From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: New EXPLAIN option: ALL |
Date: | 2019-05-07 22:25:12 |
Message-ID: | 5221.1557267912@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> I'm generally in favor of doing something like what Tom is suggesting
> with VERBOSE, but I also feel like it should be the default for formats
> like JSON. If you're asking for the output in JSON, then we really
> should include everything that a flag like VERBOSE would contain because
> you're pretty clearly planning to copy/paste that output into something
> else to read it anyway.
Meh --- I don't especially care for non-orthogonal behaviors like that.
If you wanted JSON but *not* all of the additional info, how would you
specify that? (The implementation I had in mind would make VERBOSE OFF
more or less a no-op, so that wouldn't get you there.)
>> I do feel that it's a good idea to keep ANALYZE separate. "Execute
>> the query or not" is a mighty fundamental thing. I've never liked
>> that name for the option though --- maybe we could deprecate it
>> in favor of EXECUTE?
> Let's not fool ourselves by saying we'd 'deprecate' it because that
> implies, at least to me, that there's some intention of later on
> removing it
True, the odds of ever actually removing it are small :-(. I meant
mostly changing all of our docs to use the other spelling, except
for some footnote. Maybe we could call ANALYZE a "legacy spelling"
of EXECUTE.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2019-05-07 22:31:55 | Re: Failure in contrib test _int on loach |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2019-05-07 22:12:56 | Re: New EXPLAIN option: ALL |