Обсуждение: Another incorrect comment for pg_stat_statements
Hi, hackers There has $subject that introduced by commit 6b4d23feef6. When we reset the entries if all parameters are avaiable, non-top-level entries removed first, then top-level entries. On branch REL_15_STABLE Your branch is up to date with 'origin/REL_15_STABLE'. Changes not staged for commit: (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed) (use "git restore <file>..." to discard changes in working directory) modified: contrib/pg_stat_statements/pg_stat_statements.c no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a") -- Regrads, Japin Li.
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:53 AM Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi, hackers
There has $subject that introduced by commit 6b4d23feef6. When we reset the entries
if all parameters are avaiable, non-top-level entries removed first, then top-level
entries.
I did not see the diffs. Maybe uploaded the wrong attachment?
Thanks
Richard
Thanks
Richard
On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 at 11:22, Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:53 AM Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Hi, hackers >> >> There has $subject that introduced by commit 6b4d23feef6. When we reset >> the entries >> if all parameters are avaiable, non-top-level entries removed first, then >> top-level >> entries. > > > I did not see the diffs. Maybe uploaded the wrong attachment? > My bad! Here is the patch. Thanks! diff --git a/contrib/pg_stat_statements/pg_stat_statements.c b/contrib/pg_stat_statements/pg_stat_statements.c index 21bede29fe..670c993816 100644 --- a/contrib/pg_stat_statements/pg_stat_statements.c +++ b/contrib/pg_stat_statements/pg_stat_statements.c @@ -2552,7 +2552,7 @@ entry_reset(Oid userid, Oid dbid, uint64 queryid) key.dbid = dbid; key.queryid = queryid; - /* Remove the key if it exists, starting with the top-level entry */ + /* Remove the key if it exists, starting with the non-top-level entry */ key.toplevel = false; entry = (pgssEntry *) hash_search(pgss_hash, &key, HASH_REMOVE, NULL); if (entry) /* found */ -- Regrads, Japin Li.
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 12:15:47PM +0800, Japin Li wrote: > - /* Remove the key if it exists, starting with the top-level entry */ > + /* Remove the key if it exists, starting with the non-top-level entry */ > key.toplevel = false; > entry = (pgssEntry *) hash_search(pgss_hash, &key, HASH_REMOVE, NULL); > if (entry) /* found */ Nice catch. That's indeed wrong. Will fix. -- Michael
Вложения
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:04 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 12:15:47PM +0800, Japin Li wrote:
> - /* Remove the key if it exists, starting with the top-level entry */
> + /* Remove the key if it exists, starting with the non-top-level entry */
> key.toplevel = false;
> entry = (pgssEntry *) hash_search(pgss_hash, &key, HASH_REMOVE, NULL);
> if (entry) /* found */
Nice catch. That's indeed wrong. Will fix.
+1. To nitpick, how about we remove the blank line just before removing
the key for top level entry?
- /* Also remove entries for top level statements */
+ /* Also remove entries if exist for top level statements */
key.toplevel = true;
-
- /* Remove the key if exists */
entry = (pgssEntry *) hash_search(pgss_hash, &key, HASH_REMOVE, NULL);
Thanks
Richard
the key for top level entry?
- /* Also remove entries for top level statements */
+ /* Also remove entries if exist for top level statements */
key.toplevel = true;
-
- /* Remove the key if exists */
entry = (pgssEntry *) hash_search(pgss_hash, &key, HASH_REMOVE, NULL);
Thanks
Richard
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 03:09:55PM +0800, Richard Guo wrote: > +1. To nitpick, how about we remove the blank line just before removing > the key for top level entry? > > - /* Also remove entries for top level statements */ > + /* Also remove entries if exist for top level statements */ > key.toplevel = true; > - > - /* Remove the key if exists */ > entry = (pgssEntry *) hash_search(pgss_hash, &key, HASH_REMOVE, NULL); Why not if it improves the overall situation. Could you send a patch with everything you have in mind? -- Michael
Вложения
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:36 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 03:09:55PM +0800, Richard Guo wrote:
> +1. To nitpick, how about we remove the blank line just before removing
> the key for top level entry?
>
> - /* Also remove entries for top level statements */
> + /* Also remove entries if exist for top level statements */
> key.toplevel = true;
> -
> - /* Remove the key if exists */
> entry = (pgssEntry *) hash_search(pgss_hash, &key, HASH_REMOVE, NULL);
Why not if it improves the overall situation. Could you send a patch
with everything you have in mind?
Here is the patch. I don't have too much in mind, so the patch just
removes the blank line and revises the comment a bit.
Thanks
Richard
removes the blank line and revises the comment a bit.
Thanks
Richard
Вложения
On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 at 16:27, Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:36 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 03:09:55PM +0800, Richard Guo wrote: >> > +1. To nitpick, how about we remove the blank line just before removing >> > the key for top level entry? >> > >> > - /* Also remove entries for top level statements */ >> > + /* Also remove entries if exist for top level statements */ >> > key.toplevel = true; >> > - >> > - /* Remove the key if exists */ >> > entry = (pgssEntry *) hash_search(pgss_hash, &key, HASH_REMOVE, NULL); >> >> Why not if it improves the overall situation. Could you send a patch >> with everything you have in mind? > > > Here is the patch. I don't have too much in mind, so the patch just > removes the blank line and revises the comment a bit. > +1. LGTM. -- Regrads, Japin Li.
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 09:26:02PM +0800, Japin Li wrote: > +1. LGTM. Nothing much to add, so applied with the initial comment fix. -- Michael
Вложения
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 at 08:19, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 09:26:02PM +0800, Japin Li wrote: >> +1. LGTM. > > Nothing much to add, so applied with the initial comment fix. Thanks! -- Regrads, Japin Li.
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 8:19 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
Nothing much to add, so applied with the initial comment fix.
Thanks for pushing it!
Thanks
Richard
Thanks
Richard