Re: machine-readable explain output

On 6/14/09, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 2009/6/14 Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>:
>> On 6/13/09, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> --On 13. Juni 2009 15:01:43 -0400 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Also, the result type of an EXPLAIN (format xml) should be type xml,
>>>>> not
>>>>> text.
>>>>
>>>> Seems reasonable. I'll see if I can figure out how to do that.
>>>
>>> I suppose it's okay then, that the format is not available when the
>>> server
>>> isn't build with --with-libxml ?
>>
>> I hope not, otherwise the usefulness of the format is significantly
>> reduced (to practically zero) if tools cannot rely on it being
>> available and have to fall back to something else if it's not
>> available.
>>
>
> I thing so using --with-libxml is good idea. Is nonsense repeat some
> necessary xml code like xml escaping and similar. And almost all
> distributed PostgreSQL binaries are compiled with xml support, so this
> cannot do some problems. When somebody compile pg without xml support,
> then he knows what he do.

That will mean we never get to use XML explain in pgAdmin. We're not
in the business of writing basic features that might work, if the
postgres packager enabled an option. We need to be able to rely on
such features always being available.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com