From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: EXPLAIN omits schema? |
Date: | 2007-06-13 14:49:18 |
Message-ID: | 467003EE.2080209@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I agree with the idea of having an option to get EXPLAIN's output in
> an entirely different, more machine-readable format. Not wedded to
> XML, but I fear that a pure relational structure might be too strict ---
> there's a lot of variability in the entries already. XML also could
> deal naturally with nesting, whereas we'd have to jump through hoops
> to represent the plan tree structure in relational form.
>
>
I agree. XML seems like a fairly natural fit for this. Just as people
should not try to shoehorn everything into XML, neither should they try
to shoehorn everything into a relational format either.
Now all we need is an XML schema for it ;-)
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2007-06-13 14:54:01 | Re: Truncate Permission |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2007-06-13 14:45:17 | Re: EXPLAIN omits schema? |