Re: JIT performance bug/regression & JIT EXPLAIN
От | Maciek Sakrejda |
---|---|
Тема | Re: JIT performance bug/regression & JIT EXPLAIN |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAOtHd0Ar_L33QKWqkjmAw=J90KO7jrrbzAZ6YEpYxDs4+Oy8bQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | JIT performance bug/regression & JIT EXPLAIN (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: JIT performance bug/regression & JIT EXPLAIN
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>But that's pretty crappy, because it means that the 'shape' of the output depends on the jit_details option. Yeah, that would be hard to work with. What about adding it as a sibling group? "Filter": "(lineitem.l_shipdate <= '1998-09-18 00:00:00'::timestamp without time zone)", "Filter JIT": { "Expr": "evalexpr_0_2", "Deform Scan": "deform_0_3", "Deform Outer": null, "Deform Inner": null } Also not that pretty, but at least it's easier to work with (I also changed the dashes to spaces since that's what the rest of EXPLAIN is doing as a matter of style). >But the compat break due to that change is not small- perhaps we could instead mark that in another way? We could add a "Projects" boolean key instead? Of course that's more awkward in text mode. Maybe compat break is less of an issue in text mode and we can treat this differently? >I'm not sure that 'TRANS' is the best placeholder for the transition value here. Maybe $TRANS would be clearer? +1, I think the `$` makes it clearer that this is not a literal expression. >For HashJoin/Hash I've added 'Outer Hash Key' and 'Hash Key' for each key, but only in verbose mode. That reads pretty well to me. What does the structured output look like?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: