Re: EXPLAIN omits schema?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Dave Page" <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: EXPLAIN omits schema?
Date: 2007-06-13 22:05:55
Message-ID: 18945.1181772355@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Once you have an XML plan what can you do with it? All you can do is parse it
> into constituent bits and display it. You cant do any sort of comparison
> between plans, aggregate results, search for plans matching constraints, etc.

Sure you can, just not in SQL ;-)

Given the amount of trouble we'd have to go to to put the data into a
pure SQL format, I don't think that's exactly an ideal answer either.
I'm for making the raw EXPLAIN output be in a simple and robust format,
which people can then postprocess however they want --- including
forcing it into SQL if that's what they want. But just because we're a
SQL database doesn't mean we should think SQL is the best answer to
every problem.

While I'm surely not an XML fanboy, it looks better suited to this
problem than a pure relational representation would be.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-06-13 22:06:03 Re: tsearch_core patch: permissions and security issues
Previous Message Florian G. Pflug 2007-06-13 22:04:57 Re: Controlling Load Distributed Checkpoints