Re: generic options for explain

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: generic options for explain
Date: 2009-05-26 14:36:56
Message-ID: 4A1BFE88.7030205@hagander.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>> In libxml-enabled builds at least, this could presumably be done fairly
>> easily via the XML functions, especially if we get XSLT processing into the
>> core XML functionality as I hope we can do this release. In fact, the
>> ability to leverage existing XML functionality to munge the output is the
>> thing that swings me in favor of XML as the machine readable output format
>> instead of JSON, since we don't have and aren't terribly likely to get an
>> inbuilt JSON parser. It means we wouldn't need some external tool at all.

Actually, I think a number of users would be *very* happy if we had a
builtin JSON parser. I'm unsure on how feasible that is though.

> I was thinking something similar, but from the pgAdmin perspective. We
> already use libxml2, but JSON would introduce another dependency for
> us.

Yeah, but probably not a huge one. There is one for wx, but I don't
think it's included by default.

--
Magnus Hagander
Self: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-05-26 14:38:42 Re: generic options for explain
Previous Message Aidan Van Dyk 2009-05-26 14:36:03 Re: problem with plural-forms