Re: proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting

On 29/01/17 05:31, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
> 2017-01-28 17:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
> <mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>>:
>
> Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>> writes:
> > Now EXPLAIN ANALYZE produce too wide rows for usage in presentations
>
> > What do you think about possibility to implement >>optional<<
> alternative
> > formatting.
> > Now:
> > node name (estimation) (actual)
> > Alternative:
> > node name (estimation)
> > (actual)
>
> Seems like that would make a difference in only a tiny minority of
> situations. In a deeply nested plan you'll have trouble no matter
> what, and it's not uncommon that the node name line isn't the widest
> thing anyway.
>
>
> It is related to presentation where you have to use large type - and
> where usually don't present complex nested plans, or you present only
> fragments.
>
> A output of EXPLAIN is usually ok - EXPLAIN ANALYZE does a overflow
>
> This feature is in nice to have category - probably interesting for
> lectures or presenters only - can helps and doesn't need lot of work.
> So I am ask for community opinion.
>
> The result should not be exactly how I proposed - any form what is
> more friendly for tiny monitor (projectors) is welcome
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel
>
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
How about have a GUC to control the formatting of how it is displayed?

Could also include maximum line width (default 'infinite'), and word
wrapping rules, ...

Cheers,
Gavin