Thank you very much Laurenz and David. Looking forward to it and unfortunatelly no, I am not in position to review that... So one last question, should I expect the patch to land in version 17 only or is there chance that it will also be in lower versions right away? LJ Sent with Proton Mail secure email. ------- Original Message ------- On Tuesday, October 3rd, 2023 at 10:54 AM, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 08:05 +0000, byme@byme.email wrote: > > > "This obfuscates our monitoring because the same query with different amount of arguments gets translated into this: > > IN ($1, $2) > > and so on." > > > > The questions are: > > 1. Shouldnt IN behave so that the query in pg_stat_statements would look like this: > > IN $1 > > 2. Shouldnt there be at least some flag to aggregate such queries into one? > > 3. Is there any workaround how to aggregate those queries except the "= ANY"? > > 4. How come no one is bothered by this if this makes pg_stat_statements unusable with lots of queries using IN, what others do with this problem? > > 5. what do you mean by changing pg_stat_statements with another view/table? > > > There is currently a patch for this very problem under review: > > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/44/2837/ > > The discussion is here: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CA+q6zcWtUbT_Sxj0V6HY6EZ89uv5wuG5aefpe_9n0Jr3VwntFg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > You could comment on that patch or review it. Useful reviews and supporting > comments help move the patch forward. That would best serve your interests. > > Yours, > Laurenz Albe
