Re: making EXPLAIN extensible

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: making EXPLAIN extensible
Date: 2025-03-18 18:40:19
Message-ID: 137944.1742323219@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> If you mean just after, that would amount to deciding that information
> coming from extensions goes before information from core rather than
> after. I thought about that and it's defensible, but in the end I
> thought it made more sense for core info to come first. We could
> bikeshed this endlessly, but there's no single choice that's going to
> make everybody 100% happy, and adding a whole bunch of extra hooks to
> cater to various preferences about exactly how the output should look
> does not seem worth it to me.

FWIW, I am fairly strongly against that. Every extension author is
going to feel that their information is so important it should come
first. Other people might have a different opinion about that, and
in any case they can't all be first.

There's certainly room for bikeshedding here, but I think it'd be good
to get some actual experience before redesigning what you've done.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2025-03-18 18:45:28 Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0
Previous Message Álvaro Herrera 2025-03-18 18:33:25 Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions