| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Ending EXPLAIN ANALYZE early (was Re: That EXPLAIN ANALYZE patch still needs work) |
| Date: | 2006-06-09 16:18:35 |
| Message-ID: | 12726.1149869915@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
>> This bothers me a bit, because in
>> fact the effects if any of the tested query would have been
>> rolled back. Not sure we have any choice though. If we
>> expose the error then we'll have problems with clients not
>> showing the EXPLAIN results.
> I think we should leave it in top level, throw the error and fix the
> clients.
> As I understood, the idea was, that it only does that if you
> press ^C or query timeout. In this case current clients would also
> not show the plan.
Not if the clients are implemented per protocol spec. A client cannot
assume that sending QueryCancel will make the current query fail.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sven Geisler | 2006-06-09 16:20:14 | patch postgresql for AMD64 (Opteron) |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-06-09 16:14:27 | Re: That EXPLAIN ANALYZE patch still needs work |