From: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Planning time in explain/explain analyze |
Date: | 2013-12-25 00:57:57 |
Message-ID: | 52BA2D95.9050205@proxel.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/24/2013 05:09 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Yeah. The alternatives seem to be:
>>
>> 1. Change a lot of regression tests. This would be a serious PITA,
>> not so much for the one-time cost as for every time we needed to
>> back-patch a regression test that includes explain output. -1.
>>
>> 2. Don't display the planning time by default, necessitating a new
>> PLANNING_TIME ON option. This has backwards compatibility to
>> recommend it, but not much else.
>>
>> 3. Let COSTS OFF suppress it.
>
> Another option would be to not display it by default, but make VERBOSE
> show it. However, I think making it controlled by COSTS is a better
> fit.
After some thinking COSTS OFF really seems to be the best option. I have
changed this in the patch and will submit a patch with updated
documentation as soon as I get the time. Adding "Planning time" to all
explain outputs (only 37 of them) in the documentation should not
clutter anything too much.
--
Andreas Karlsson
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-12-25 05:26:54 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_prewarm, a contrib module for prewarming relationd data. |
Previous Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2013-12-25 00:54:19 | Re: Planning time in explain/explain analyze |