| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Default gucs for EXPLAIN |
| Date: | 2020-05-27 05:10:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvoxcovmhfqQ8EcMbKqSfpUDDjvEu-VG4=GRigOzwwry=A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 23:59, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org> wrote:
> Are you saying we should have all new EXPLAIN options off forever into
> the future because apps won't know about the new data? I guess we
> should also not ever introduce new plan nodes because those won't be
> known either.
Another argument against this is that it creates dependency among the
new GUCs. Many of the options are not compatible with each other. e.g.
postgres=# explain (timing on) select 1;
ERROR: EXPLAIN option TIMING requires ANALYZE
Would you propose we just error out in that case, or should we
silently enable the required option, or disable the conflicting
option?
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2020-05-27 05:27:52 | Re: Default gucs for EXPLAIN |
| Previous Message | Masahiro Ikeda | 2020-05-27 04:14:51 | Re: Why don't you to document pg_shmem_allocations view's name list? |