On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 22:12, Shigeru HANADA <hanada@metrosystems.co.jp> wrote:
>> My concern is the explainInfo interface is not ideal for the purpose
>> and therefore it will be unstable interface. If we support nested plans
>> in FDWs, each FDW should receive a tree writer used internally in
>> explain.c. explainInfo, that is a plan text, is not enough for complex
>> FdwPlans. However, since we don't have any better solution for now,
>> we could have the variable for 9.1. It's much better than nothing.
>
> When I was writing file_fdw, I hoped to use static functions in
> explain.c such as ExplainProperty() to handle complex information.
> Even for single plan node, I think that filename and size (currently
> they are printed in a plain text together) should be separated in the
> output of explain, especially when the format was XML or JSON.
Just an idea -- we could return complex node trees with explainInfo
if we use XML or JSON for the format. For example, pgsql_fdw can
return the result from "EXPLAIN (FORMAT json)" without modification.
It might be one of the reasons we should should support JSON in the core :)
--
Itagaki Takahiro
