Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS
Date
Msg-id 28694.1260801646@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS  (Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Pushing extra arguments around would create overhead of its own ...
>> overhead that would be paid even when not using EXPLAIN at all.

> I cannot understand what you mean... The additional argument should
> not be a performance overhead because the code path is run only once
> per execution.

Hmm, maybe, but still: once you have two flags you're likely to need
more.  I concur with turning doInstrument into a bitmask as per Robert's
suggestion downthread.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: thread safety on clients