| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: jit and explain nontext |
| Date: | 2020-11-21 07:39:11 |
| Message-ID: | e5f51922-a6af-4ada-62fa-a18ca6d0b469@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-11-20 17:16, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> It matters if it was planned with jit but executed without jit.
>
> postgres=# DEALLOCATE p; SET jit=on; SET jit_above_cost=0; prepare p as select from generate_series(1,9); explain(format yaml) execute p; SET jit=off; explain(format yaml) execute p;
>
> Patched shows this for both explains:
> JIT: +
> Functions: 3 +
>
> Unpatched shows only in the first case.
In this context, I don't see the point of this change. If you set
jit=off explicitly, then there is no need to clutter the EXPLAIN output
with a bunch of zeroes about JIT.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andy Fan | 2020-11-21 08:58:47 | Re: Different results between PostgreSQL and Oracle for "for update" statement |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2020-11-21 07:29:19 | Re: [doc] improve tableoid description |