From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Klemme <shortcutter(at)googlemail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Seeing execution plan of foreign key constraint check? |
Date: | 2016-07-21 22:14:55 |
Message-ID: | 1e196503-3b9b-b16b-22a2-9e080faa4007@BlueTreble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 7/21/16 4:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > As for function plans, ISTM that could be added to the PL handlers if we
>> > wanted to (allow a function invocation to return an array of explain
>> > outputs).
> Where would you put those, particularly for functions executed many
> times in the query? Would it include sub-functions recursively?
> I mean, yeah, in principle we could do something roughly like that,
> but it's not easy and presenting the results intelligibly seems
> almost impossible.
Yeah, it'd certainly need to be handled internally in a
machine-understandable form that got aggregated before presentation (or
with non-text output formats we could provide the raw data). Or just
punt and don't capture the data unless you're using an alternative
output format.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2016-07-21 22:20:32 | Re: less than 2 sec for response - possible? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-07-21 21:59:44 | Re: Seeing execution plan of foreign key constraint check? |