Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting

On 29/01/17 05:31, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
> 2017-01-28 17:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us 
> <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>>:
>
>     Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com
>     <mailto:pavel.stehule@gmail.com>> writes:
>     > Now EXPLAIN ANALYZE produce too wide rows for usage in presentations
>
>     > What do you think about possibility to implement >>optional<<
>     alternative
>     > formatting.
>     > Now:
>     >   node name (estimation) (actual)
>     > Alternative:
>     >   node name (estimation)
>     >                    (actual)
>
>     Seems like that would make a difference in only a tiny minority of
>     situations.  In a deeply nested plan you'll have trouble no matter
>     what, and it's not uncommon that the node name line isn't the widest
>     thing anyway.
>
>
> It is related to presentation where you have to use large type - and 
> where usually don't present complex nested plans, or you present only 
> fragments.
>
> A output of EXPLAIN is usually ok - EXPLAIN ANALYZE does a overflow
>
> This feature is in nice to have category - probably interesting for 
> lectures or presenters only - can helps and doesn't need lot of work. 
> So I am ask for community opinion.
>
> The result should not be exactly how I proposed - any form what is 
> more friendly for tiny monitor (projectors) is welcome
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel
>
>
>                             regards, tom lane
>
>
How about have a GUC to control the formatting of how it is displayed?

Could also include maximum line width (default 'infinite'), and word 
wrapping rules, ...


Cheers,
Gavin