| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| 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: | 2006-06-08 19:01:26 |
| Message-ID: | 29824.1149793286@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Would it be possible to make a whole new protocol message for EXPLAIN results?
I'm really unwilling to get into that. For one thing, that would
absolutely positively break *all* use of EXPLAIN from un-fixed clients,
whether you were trying to stop early or not.
> The reason I'm suggesting that is because it might make it easier to implement
> the SIGINFO handler that sends incremental EXPLAIN results on demand that I
> was describing earlier.
Doesn't matter, because that's not happening ;-) SIGINFO isn't
portable, and even if it were, a signal handler couldn't possibly
generate EXPLAIN output (remember those catalog accesses).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-06-08 19:06:01 | Re: [PATCHES] drop if exists remainder |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2006-06-08 19:00:55 | Re: ADD/DROP INHERITS |