Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070912071905g1a69437ch6e85282d6016ed11@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS  (Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Itagaki Takahiro
<itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Here is an updated patch per discussion.
>
>  * Counters are accumulative. They contain I/Os by child nodes.
>  * Text format shows all counters.
>  * Add "shared_" prefix to variables representing shared buffers/blocks.
>
> Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler@timbira.com> wrote:
>
>> Itagaki Takahiro escreveu:
>> > I think the current output is enough and useful in normal use.
>> > We can use XML or JSON format for more details.
>> >
>> I don't think it is a good idea to have different information in different
>> formats. I'm with Robert; *don't* do that.
>
> I'm afraid of the human-unreadability of the text format, that is discussed
> in the YAML format thread. ...but I found we say the following in the docs.
>
>  XML or JSON output contains the same information as the text output format
>  http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/sql-explain.html
>
> Obviously I should not hide any information only in the text format.
> The new output will be: (in one line)
>  Shared Blocks: (hit=2 read=1641 written=0) Local Blocks: (hit=0 read=0 written=0) Temp Blocks: (read=1443
written=1443)

Hmm, that's a little awkward.  I think we could drop some of the punctuation.

Shared Blocks: hit 2 read 1641 wrote 0, Local Blocks: hit 0 read 0
wrote 0, Temp Blocks: read 1443 wrote 1443

...Robert


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Exclusion Constraint vs. Constraint Exclusion
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: YAML