Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting
| От | Pavel Stehule |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFj8pRBuj_DfHPKeTBYsmqMux8VCcAJ0Qb+gpWoioFNcZzfJbA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting
Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
2017-01-28 17:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
Pavel Stehule <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
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: