Re: [PERFORMANCE] work_mem vs temp files issue

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Yeah.  My question is whether it's acceptable to add an extra line to
>> the EXPLAIN output for every hash join, even w/o ANALYZE.
>
> We could add it if either VERBOSE or ANALYZE appears.  Not sure if
> that's just too much concern for backwards compatibility, though.

I think having it controlled by either of two options is to weird.
I'm not worried so much about backward compatibility as I am about
cluttering the output. Maybe making it controlled by VERBOSE is the
right thing to do, although I'm sort of tempted to figure out if there
is more useful instrumentation that could be done and put it all under
a new option called, say, HASH_DETAILS. Not sure what else we could
show though.

...Robert