Re: [PATCH] Improve EXPLAIN ANALYZE overhead by sampling

On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 12:09:37AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 12:22:54PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > A #define is doable, though messy. The code isn't all that long anyway
> > so a few #ifdefs might make it confusing. But I'll see what I can do.
>
> If it proves messy, it's probably not worth doing. Presumably anyone
> able to tweak a #define could probably apply a patch as well. If you are
> going to go through the effort it probably makes the most sense to just
> add the remaining syntax to make it dynamic.

Making it configurable via a GUC would be much easier than making ik
optional at compile time because then you just need to skip the tests
for 'to sample or not'. To make it optional at compile time you'd need
to actually take out all the code relating to sampling.

Maybe:

enable_explain_sample (default: yes)

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.