| From: | Christoph Berg <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | ronan(at)dunklau(dot)fr, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Hide 'Execution time' in EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) |
| Date: | 2014-10-13 15:41:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20141013154117.GG30176@msg.df7cb.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Re: Tom Lane 2014-10-12 <19766(dot)1413129321(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Another possibility, which would introduce less non-orthogonality into
> the switch design, is to remove the connection to COSTS OFF but say that
> planning time is only printed when execution time is also printed (ie,
> only in EXPLAIN ANALYZE). This seems to me that it would not be removing
> much functionality, because if you just did a plain EXPLAIN then you can
> take the client-side runtime (psql \timing) as a close-enough estimate
> of planning time.
I like that idea. Also, while the planning time is real even when
doing a plain EXPLAIN, people who are interested in runtime behavior
will be running full EXPLAIN (ANALYZE) anyway.
My original suggestion to let (TIMING OFF) control it would allow for
more flexibility, but as noted it isn't 100% in line with the other
options, and this "new" idea should even be much simpler to implement
or maintain.
Christoph
--
cb(at)df7cb(dot)de | http://www.df7cb.de/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-10-13 15:46:16 | Re: Hide 'Execution time' in EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-10-13 15:35:18 | Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL 9.4 mmap(2) performance regression on FreeBSD... |