On 28 March 2012 15:25, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > That's been an issue right along for cases such as EXPLAIN and EXECUTE, > I believe.
Possible, since I didn't have test coverage for either of those 2 commands. Perhaps the right thing is to consider such executor calls > as nested statements --- that is, the ProcessUtility hook ought to > bump the nesting depth too. That makes a lot of sense, but it might spoil things for the pg_stat_statements.track = 'top' + pg_stat_statements.track_utility = 'on' case. At the very least, it's a POLA violation, to the extent that if you were going to do this, you might mandate that nested statements be tracked along with utility statements (probably while defaulting to having both off, which would be a change). Since you've already removed the intoClause chunk, I'm not sure how far underway the review effort is - would you like me to produce a new revision, or is that unnecessary? -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
