Re: explain vs auto_explain

On Sat, 19 Oct 2024 at 23:48, Vijaykumar Jain <
vijaykumarjain(dot)github(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
>
> ok, it makes sense for the reason of having auto_explain. but maybe i did
> ask correctly,
> why do we not have the extended flags in auto_explain , in , explain wrt
> nested_statements, and triggers ...
> a user who finds the console output complicated, could well use a pager or
> redirect the output to the file via \o which is client side.
>
>
actually my bad. pls ignore.

i forgot we could leverage client_min_messages to get the output to console

/*
postgres=# explain analyze create materialized view mv as select * from t;
QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seq Scan on t (cost=0.00..35.50 rows=2550 width=4) (actual
time=0.027..0.028 rows=0 loops=1)
Planning Time: 0.549 ms
Execution Time: 7.309 ms
(3 rows)

^
postgres=# explain analyze refresh materialized view mv;
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------
Utility statements have no plan structure
(1 row)

postgres=# alter system set client_min_messages TO log;
ALTER SYSTEM
postgres=# select pg_reload_conf();
pg_reload_conf
----------------
t
(1 row)

postgres=# refresh materialized view
postgres-# mv ;
LOG: duration: 0.016 ms plan:
Query Text: refresh materialized view
mv ;
Seq Scan on public.t (cost=0.00..35.50 rows=2550 width=4) (actual
time=0.009..0.009 rows=0 loops=1)
Output: col1
REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW
*/

I think i am good. thanks all.
--
Thanks,
Vijay

Open to work
Resume - Vijaykumar Jain <https://github.com/cabecada>