Re: Explain Analyze (Rollback off) Suggestion

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:42 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 9:33 PM David G. Johnston
> <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I'm not seeing enough similarity with the reasons for, and specific
> behaviors, of those previous GUCs to dismiss this proposal on that basis
> alone. These are "crap we messed things up" switches that alter a query
> behind the scenes in ways that a user cannot do through SQL - they simply
> provide for changing a default that we already allow the user to override
> per-query. Its akin to "DateStyle" and its pure cosmetic influencing
> ease-of-use option rather than some changing the fundamental structural
> meaning of '\n'
>
> Well, I think it's usually worse to have two possible behaviors rather
> than one. Like, a lot of people have probably made the mistake of
> running EXPLAIN ANALYZE without realizing that it's actually running
> the query, and then been surprised or dismayed afterwards.

This really belongs on the other thread (though I basically said the same
thing there two days ago):

The ANALYZE option should not be part of the GUC setup. None of the other
EXPLAIN default changing options have the same issues with being on by
default - which is basically what we are talking about here: being able to
have an option be on without specifying that option in the command itself.
TIMING already does this without difficulty and the others are no different.

David J.