From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Christoph Berg <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, ronan(at)dunklau(dot)fr, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
Subject: | Re: Hide 'Execution time' in EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) |
Date: | 2014-09-23 17:58:21 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZW_qFBmCdJRKJM04P-EmuJzOj=hQL2Dq7KVtPPjK62gQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Christoph Berg <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de> wrote:
>>> Can we have "EXPLAIN (timing off)" in 9.4+ hide the "Planning time"
>>> line? That would even be backwards compatible with 9.x where it would
>>> be a no-op.
>
>> I don't think that'll work becuase:
>
>> /* check that timing is used with EXPLAIN ANALYZE */
>> if (es.timing && !es.analyze)
>> ereport(ERROR,
>> (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
>> errmsg("EXPLAIN option TIMING
>> requires ANALYZE")));
>
> It looks to me like that would complain about EXPLAIN (TIMING ON),
> not the case Christoph is suggesting. What he proposes seems a bit
> odd and non-orthogonal, but we could make the code do it if we wanted.
Ah, right.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-09-23 18:04:09 | Re: BRIN indexes - TRAP: BadArgument |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-09-23 17:51:58 | Re: delta relations in AFTER triggers |