Re: EXPLAIN omits schema?

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> 
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I agree with the idea of having an option to get EXPLAIN's output in
>> an entirely different, more machine-readable format.  Not wedded to
>> XML, but I fear that a pure relational structure might be too strict ---
>> there's a lot of variability in the entries already.  XML also could
>> deal naturally with nesting, whereas we'd have to jump through hoops
>> to represent the plan tree structure in relational form.
>>
>>   
> 
> I agree. XML seems like a fairly natural fit for this. Just as people 
> should not try to shoehorn everything into XML, neither should they try 
> to shoehorn everything into a relational format either.
> 
> Now all we need is an XML schema for it ;-)

Well I am not a big fan of XML but it certainly seems applicable in this 
case.

Joshua D. Drake


> 
> cheers
> 
> andrew
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
> 
>                http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
> 


-- 
      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997             http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/