Re: machine-readable explain output

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: machine-readable explain output
Date: 2009-06-15 12:01:13
Message-ID: 603c8f070906150501g622045ddl33d7a93b793a490e@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>>> However, using BuildTupleFromCStrings is wasteful/stupid for *both*
>>>>> text and xml output, so it seems like getting rid of it is the thing
>>>>> to do here.
>>>
>>>> Makes sense.  However, if we just make that change in do_tup_output(),
>>>> then we'll break the ability to use that function for non-text
>>>> datatypes.
>>>
>>> I'd envision it taking Datums, so it doesn't really matter.  However,
>>> as you say, specializing it to text only wouldn't be much of a loss.
>>
>> I like the Datum option, so I'll work up a patch for that, unless you
>> want to just do it and spare me the trouble.  :-)
>
> Here's an attempt.  Is this anything like what you had in mind?

Hmm... on further review, I'm thinking this is still a bit wastful,
because we don't really need (I think) to call
TupleDescGetAttInMetadata from begin_tup_output_tupdesc. But I'm not
sure what the best way is to avoid that. Any thoughts?

...Robert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gurjeet Singh 2009-06-15 12:28:07 Re: char() overhead on read-only workloads not so insignifcant as the docs claim it is...
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2009-06-15 11:26:47 Re: Should mdxxx functions(e.g. mdread, mdwrite, mdsync etc) PANIC instead of ERROR when I/O failed?