| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl> |
| Cc: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Christian Schröder <cs(at)deriva(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Performance of full outer join in 8.3 |
| Date: | 2009-04-16 18:41:15 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150904161141p2421e82cw55b59a92f402cddc@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Grzegorz Jaskiewicz
<gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl> wrote:
>
> On 16 Apr 2009, at 16:21, David Fetter wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 06:12:10AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the way to do this is to introduce plan output in XML
>>
>> If we're going with a serialization, which I think would be an
>> excellent idea, how about one that's light-weight and human-readable
>> like JSON?
>
> +1
>
> xml/json is machine readable.
> I don't think, personaly that explain (analyze) is not easy to read by
> human, quite contrary.
Is that because of how the output is formatted though, or because the
concepts are difficult to express? (I agree though, json is better
especially for structures that are possibly highly nested).
merlni
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Grzegorz Jaskiewicz | 2009-04-16 18:45:47 | Re: [GENERAL] Performance of full outer join in 8.3 |
| Previous Message | ray | 2009-04-16 18:35:07 | Re: Part way there, how do I complete it |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sam Mason | 2009-04-16 18:43:09 | Re: [rfc] unicode escapes for extended strings |
| Previous Message | Grzegorz Jaskiewicz | 2009-04-16 18:04:34 | Re: [GENERAL] Performance of full outer join in 8.3 |