Re: Expose options to explain? (track_io_timing) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Expose options to explain? (track_io_timing)
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYXT1Za5+U4StLGNGcTwtX_c7LxvTNA-e6Q0FcR+PF+3g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Expose options to explain? (track_io_timing)  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> On 10/14/2014 10:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Hmm.  IIRC, there are only two use cases for I/O timing at present:
>> pg_stat_statements (which really only makes sense if it's turned on or
>> off system-wide) and EXPLAIN.  Rather than inventing more GUC
>> machinery, I think we could just add an explain flag called "IO".  So
>> you could do:
>>
>> EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, IO) SELECT ....
>>
>> And that would gather I/O stats even if it's turned off system-wide.
>> Or you could do:
>>
>> EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, IO false) SELECT ....
>>
>> That can't really be allowed to suppress gathering the I/O stats for
>> this query if the sysadmin wants those stats for all queries.  But it
>> could suppress the print-out.
>
> I think the first one makes the most sense.

It would be both or neither, not one or the other.   All EXPLAIN
options take true/false arguments; but "true" can be omitted for
brevity.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_background (and more parallelism infrastructure patches)
Next
From: Lucas Lersch
Date:
Subject: Re: Buffer Requests Trace