| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Satoshi Nagayasu <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Akshat Nair <akshat(dot)nair(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Get explain output of postgresql in Tables |
| Date: | 2006-04-09 03:18:38 |
| Message-ID: | 200604090318.k393Ic207160@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 07:54:09AM +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
> > Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > > Structure for the human-consumable output or for something that would be
> > > machine-parsed? ISTM it would be best to keep the current output as-is,
> > > and provide some other means for producing machine-friendly output,
> > > presumably in a table format.
> >
> > How about (well-formed) XML format?
> > Anyone menthioned in the past threads?
> >
> > I guess XML is good for the explain structure.
>
> Unless you want to actually analyze the output in something like
> plpgsql, but I can certainly see uses for both. Perhaps getting one
> implimented will make it easier to implement the other.
TODO has:
* Allow EXPLAIN output to be more easily processed by scripts
--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Myron Scott | 2006-04-09 04:54:14 | Re: Support Parallel Query Execution in Executor |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-09 02:34:47 | "Fat" binaries for OS X (was Re: [GENERAL] Postgres Library natively available for Mac OSX Intel?) |