Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070912132011w590b6d03q7692ec1e02196631@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS  (Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> writes:
>> Should I add countBufferUsage boolean arguments to all places
>> doInstrument booleans are currently used? This requires several
>> minor modifications of codes in many places.
>
> Pushing extra arguments around would create overhead of its own ...
> overhead that would be paid even when not using EXPLAIN at all.

Well, I think we need to do something.  I don't really want to tack
another 5-6% overhead onto EXPLAIN ANALYZE.  Maybe we could recast the
doInstrument argument as a set of OR'd flags?

...Robert


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: KaiGai Kohei
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACE Framework - Database, Schema
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS