Re: Expose options to explain? (track_io_timing)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Expose options to explain? (track_io_timing)
Date: 2014-10-14 17:27:08
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYXT1Za5+U4StLGNGcTwtX_c7LxvTNA-e6Q0FcR+PF+3g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> On 10/14/2014 10:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Hmm. IIRC, there are only two use cases for I/O timing at present:
>> pg_stat_statements (which really only makes sense if it's turned on or
>> off system-wide) and EXPLAIN. Rather than inventing more GUC
>> machinery, I think we could just add an explain flag called "IO". So
>> you could do:
>>
>> EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, IO) SELECT ....
>>
>> And that would gather I/O stats even if it's turned off system-wide.
>> Or you could do:
>>
>> EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, IO false) SELECT ....
>>
>> That can't really be allowed to suppress gathering the I/O stats for
>> this query if the sysadmin wants those stats for all queries. But it
>> could suppress the print-out.
>
> I think the first one makes the most sense.

It would be both or neither, not one or the other. All EXPLAIN
options take true/false arguments; but "true" can be omitted for
brevity.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lucas Lersch 2014-10-14 17:27:44 Re: Buffer Requests Trace
Previous Message Robert Haas 2014-10-14 17:24:34 Re: pg_background (and more parallelism infrastructure patches)