Re: machine-readable explain output

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> I'm picturing adding a new tag, such as <iostats>, or actually I was
> thinking of <dtrace>. If we have separate tags for all the estimates
> and actual timings then any tags which come with the <iostat> or
> <dtrace> option would just get mixed up with the estimates and timing
> info.

FWIW, I like Greg's idea of subdividing the available data this way.
I'm no XML guru, so maybe there is a better way to do it --- but a
very large part of the reason for doing this at all is to have an
extensible format, and part of that IMHO is that client programs should
be able to have some rough idea of what things are even when they
don't know it exactly.

But I'd be just as happy with a naming convention, like
<planner:rowcount> versus <actual:rowcount>, etc. I don't know
enough about XML usage to understand the benefits and costs of
different ways of providing that kind of structure.

regards, tom lane