Re: So why is EXPLAIN printing only *plan* time?

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: So why is EXPLAIN printing only *plan* time?
Date: 2014-04-27 21:05:03
Message-ID: 20140427210503.GE2556@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> I'd been a bit suspicious of the recent patch to add $SUBJECT
> without the other pre-execution components, but it just now
> occurred to me that there's at least one reason why this might
> be a significant omission: any delay caused by waiting to acquire
> locks on the query's tables will be spent in the parser.

[...]

> I'm not sure if it'd be appropriate to add all of these measurements
> as separate printout lines; arguably we should just fold them into
> "planning time".
>
> Thoughts?

Having a distinction between "time spent waiting on locks" (even
just "waited on locks" as a boolean) would be very nice, imv. Having
the time spent would be best, provided it doesn't add too much. As for
individual print-out lines, perhaps we should consider putting them on
the same line? Maybe:

Planning time X.Y (waiting for locks: X.Y, other stuff: X.Y).

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-04-27 21:10:48 Re: includedir_internal headers are not self-contained
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-04-27 20:55:51 Re: includedir_internal headers are not self-contained