Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: EXPLAIN doesn't show the actual function expression for FunctionScan

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: EXPLAIN doesn't show the actual function expression for FunctionScan
Date: 2010-08-24 17:34:10
Message-ID: AANLkTikmRHeTCJK7vUOdG1fYoep_H8BpFs7HMrnNSZo0@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
>> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>  Function Scan on pg_catalog.unnest f  (cost=0.00..1.50 rows=100 width=96)
>>>   Output: (((lv)::text || op) || (rv)::text)
>>>   Function Call: unnest(ARRAY[ROW(('1.2.2'::text)::semver, '='::text, ('1.2.2'::text)::semver), ROW('1.2.23', '=', '1.2.23')])
>
>> This may be the ultimate bike-shed but Wouldn't this be clearer the
>> other way around? I generally think input comes first and then output.
>
> The order was bothering me a bit too, but there's a generic decision
> in there that the tlist is shown before any node-type-specific items.
> Not sure that we want to move it to the bottom for all of them.

I don't think we do.  Although, it has seemed to me at times that we
might want to have "output" be controlled by its own EXPLAIN option.

EXPLAIN (VERBOSE on, OUTPUT off) ...

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-08-24 17:37:36
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Unable to drop role
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-08-24 17:32:33
Subject: Re: Typing Records

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group