| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Index Tuning Features |
| Date: | 2006-10-10 23:15:09 |
| Message-ID: | 14250.1160522109@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> Anything that can be done to wheedle down your choices
> before you have to run EXPLAIN ANALYZE is a bonus.
Fair enough, but I prefer Peter's suggestion of attaching the
hypothetical index definitions to EXPLAIN itself, rather than making
bogus catalog entries. Something along the line of
EXPLAIN <statement>
ASSUMING INDEX fooi ON foo ....
[ ASSUMING INDEX ... ]
although this exact syntax probably doesn't work unless we're willing
to make ASSUMING a fully reserved word :-(
I have some vague recollection that this idea has been discussed
before...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Woodward | 2006-10-11 00:17:20 | Re: Index Tuning Features |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-10 23:06:57 | Re: query optimization with UDFs |