Re: ALTER TABLE ... NOREWRITE option

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE ... NOREWRITE option
Date: 2012-12-05 00:16:50
Message-ID: 50BE9272.6030303@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> Sure, and the DevOps staff would be using the EXPLAIN feature (if we had
> it). After which they could do little anyway except complain to the ORM
> authors, who might or might not give a damn. I don't see that there's
> enough value-added from what you suggest to justify the development
> time.

You're still thinking of a schema change as a SQL script. ORM-based
applications usually do not run their schema changes as SQL scripts,
thus there's nothing to EXPLAIN. Anything which assumes the presense of
a distict, user-accessible SQL script is going to leave out a large
class of our users.

However, as I said, if we had the EXPLAIN ALTER, we could use
auto-explain to log the ALTER plans (finally, a good use for
auto-explain). So that's a workable workaround. And EXPLAIN ALTER would
offer us more flexibility than any logging option, of course.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-12-05 00:20:44 Re: PITR potentially broken in 9.2
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2012-12-04 23:42:21 Re: Slow query: bitmap scan troubles