From: | Bogdan Pilch <bogdan(at)matfyz(dot)cz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Gregory Smith <gregsmithpgsql(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Time measurement format - more human readable |
Date: | 2014-09-30 14:52:57 |
Message-ID: | 20140930145257.GA123870@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
How about, the format of psql duration can be set via some ...
backslash command or commdn line switch? And the default of course
remains the current behavior?
bogdan
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On 2014-09-28 20:32:30 -0400, Gregory Smith wrote:
> >> On 9/28/14, 7:49 AM, Bogdan Pilch wrote:
> >>> I have created a small patch to postgres source (in particular the
> >>> psql part of it) that modifies the way time spent executing the SQL
> >>> commands is printed out.
>
> >> There are already a wide range of human readable time interval output
> >> formats available in the database; see the list at http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/datatype-datetime.html#INTERVAL-STYLE-OUTPUT-TABLE
>
> > He's talking about psql's \timing...
>
> Indeed. Still, it seems like this has more downside than upside.
> It seems likely to break some peoples' scripts, and where exactly
> is the groundswell of complaint that the existing format is
> unreadable? TBH, I've not heard even one complaint about that
> before today. On the other hand, the number of complaints we will
> get if we change the format is likely to be more than zero.
>
> regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-09-30 14:56:07 | Re: pgcrypto: PGP armor headers |
Previous Message | Marko Tiikkaja | 2014-09-30 14:45:57 | Re: pgcrypto: PGP armor headers |