The trouble with the original choice here is that "?" is a valid (and
indeed used) operator name, so that you could end up with ambiguous
statement texts like "SELECT ? ? ?". With this patch, you instead
see "SELECT $1 ? $2", which seems significantly more readable.
The numbers used for this purpose begin after the last actual $N parameter
in the particular query. The conflict with external parameters has its own
potential for confusion of course, but it was agreed to be an improvement
over the previous behavior.
Lukas Fittl
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAP53PkxeaCuwYmF-A4J5z2-qk5fYFo5_NH3gpXGJJBxv1DMwEw@mail.gmail.com
Make use of the statement boundary info added by commit ab1f0c822
to let pg_stat_statements behave more sanely when multiple SQL queries
are jammed into one query string. It now records just the relevant
part of the source string, not the whole thing, for each individual
query.
Even when no multi-statement strings are involved, users may notice small
changes in the output: leading and trailing whitespace and semicolons will
be stripped from statements, which did not happen before.
Also, significantly expand pg_stat_statements' regression test script.
Fabien Coelho, reviewed by Craig Ringer and Kyotaro Horiguchi,
some mods by me
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/alpine.DEB.2.20.1612200926310.29821@lancre
While the set of covered functionality is fairly small, the added tests
still are useful to get some basic buildfarm testing of
pg_stat_statements itself, but also to exercise the lwlock tranch code
on the buildfarm.
Author: Amit Kapila, slightly editorialized by me
Reviewed-By: Ashutosh Sharma, Andres Freund
Discussion: <CAA4eK1JOjkdXYtHxh=2aDK4VgDtN-LNGKY_YqX0N=YEvuzQVWg@mail.gmail.com>
