From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Mats Kindahl <mats(at)timescale(dot)com> |
Cc: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Hooking into ExplainOneQuery() complicated by missing standard_ExplainOneQuery |
Date: | 2024-03-05 23:25:16 |
Message-ID: | Zeep3F-uh8oDpuR3@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 08:21:34AM +0100, Mats Kindahl wrote:
> I realize that a more advanced system is possible to create where you can
> customize the output even more, but in this case I just wanted to add a
> section with some additional information related to plan execution. Also,
> the code in explain.c seems to not be written with extensibility in mind,
> so I did not want to make too big a change here before thinking through how
> this would work.
Sure.
> Just to elaborate: the intention was to allow a section to be added to
> every node in the plan containing information from further down and also
> allow this information to propagate upwards. We happen to have buffer
> information right now, but allowing something similar to be added
> dynamically by extending ExplainNode and passing down a callback to
> standard_ExplainOneQuery.
Or an extra hook at the end of ExplainNode() to be able to append more
information at node level? Not sure if others would agree with that,
though.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Zhang | 2024-03-06 00:12:06 | Re: Proposal for implementing OCSP Stapling in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2024-03-05 23:20:13 | Re: vacuumdb/clusterdb/reindexdb: allow specifying objects to process in all databases |