Re: REVIEW: EXPLAIN and nfiltered
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: REVIEW: EXPLAIN and nfiltered |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 14894.1295539839@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: REVIEW: EXPLAIN and nfiltered (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: REVIEW: EXPLAIN and nfiltered
Re: REVIEW: EXPLAIN and nfiltered |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: >> This patch looked good, in general, to me. �I added a few documentation >> updates and a comment, but it's a very straight-forward patch as far as >> I can tell. �Passes all regressions and my additional testing. > I have not looked at the code for this patch at all as yet, but just > as a general user comment - I really, really want this. It's one of > about, uh, two pieces of information that the EXPLAIN output doesn't > give you that is incredibly important for troubleshooting. What's the other one? The main problem I've got with this patch is that there's no place to shoehorn the information into the textual EXPLAIN format without breaking a lot of expectations (and hence code --- it's insane to imagine that any significant amount of client-side code has been rewritten to make use of xml/json output yet). It would be nice to know what other requests are likely to be coming down the pike before we decide exactly how we're going to break things. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: