Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Wups ... for some reason it's "use_remote_estimate" in the docs. Thinko
>> on my part probably --- although on reflection, maybe that's a better
>> name anyway?
> Indeed, use_remote_estimate is better. use_remote_explain makes it sound
> like an EXPLAIN query would be sent to remote server. That is at least the
> first impression I had when testing the feature without reading the docs.
Well, it does do that, at least for the part of the query that will be
executed on the remote server. But if you read it to mean the whole
query would be EXPLAINed on the remote server, that's wrong.
The objection I have to "use_remote_explain" is that it's focusing too
much on the mechanism (ie, send an EXPLAIN command for execution) rather
than the result (ie, get a cost estimate from the remote server).
So I'm inclined to change the code to match the docs rather than vice
versa. Anyone have a contrary opinion?
regards, tom lane