| From: | Andrei Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Mats Kindahl <mats(at)timescale(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hooking into ExplainOneQuery() complicated by missing standard_ExplainOneQuery |
| Date: | 2024-03-06 02:26:49 |
| Message-ID: | 8aae908b-7e9d-4287-959d-18765f84c725@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/3/2024 06:25, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Just to elaborate: the intention was to allow a section to be added to
>> every node in the plan containing information from further down and also
>> allow this information to propagate upwards. We happen to have buffer
>> information right now, but allowing something similar to be added
>> dynamically by extending ExplainNode and passing down a callback to
>> standard_ExplainOneQuery.
>
> Or an extra hook at the end of ExplainNode() to be able to append more
> information at node level? Not sure if others would agree with that,
> though.
We already discussed EXPLAIN hooks, at least in [1]. IMO, extensions
should have a chance to add something to the node explain and the
summary, if only because they can significantly influence the planner
and executor's behaviour.
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/6cd5caa7-06e1-4460-bf35-00a59da3f677%40garret.ru
--
regards,
Andrei Lepikhov
Postgres Professional
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2024-03-06 03:00:03 | Re: CREATE DATABASE with filesystem cloning |
| Previous Message | wenhui qiu | 2024-03-06 02:23:23 | Re: Support "Right Semi Join" plan shapes |