From: | Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS |
Date: | 2009-12-08 04:46:56 |
Message-ID: | 20091208134656.484D.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > (1) Blocks Shared: (hit=2 read=1641 written=0) Local: (hit=0 read=0
> > written=0) Temp: (read=1443 written=1443)
> I could live with the equals signs, but the use of parentheses seems
> weird and inconsistent with normal english usage (which permits
> parentheses as a means of making parenthetical comments). (You can
> also put an entire sentence in parentheses.) But you can't: (do
> this).
+1 for (1) personally, if we could think it is not in English but just
a symbol. I have another idea to make it alike with ANALYZE output.
(4) Blocks (shared hit=2 read=1641 ...) (local hit=0 ...) (temp read=0 ...)
Which is the best? I think it's a matter of preference.
(0) 109 characters - Shared Blocks: hit 2 read 1641 wrote 0, ...
(1) 105 characters - Blocks Shared: (hit=2 ...
(2) 96 characters - Blocks Shared:hit=2 ...
(3) 82 characters - Blocks Shared:(hit=2 ...
(4) 82 characters - Blocks (shared hit=2 ...
BTW, I found text is a *bad* format because it requires much discussion ;)
We have a little choice in XML, JSON and YAML formats.
Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2009-12-08 05:05:33 | Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-12-08 04:16:19 | Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS |