Re: machine-readable explain output v4

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I may be thick as a post here and say "oh, I'm a moron" when you
> explain this to me, but I still don't understand why that would
> require the XML notation to interpose an intermediate node. Why can't
> "filter" node itself can be the labelled container?

Filter isn't a node; it's a property of the containing Plan node.
The way we have this set up, there's a distinction between properties
and groups, which AFAICS we have to have in order to have directly
comparable structures in XML and JSON. Didn't you design this
yourself?

(I think part of the issue is that containers in JSON are anonymous
whereas XML wants to assign them a named type. That's fine with me,
in fact the JSON approach looks rather impoverished.)

regards, tom lane