Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Include planning time in EXPLAIN ANALYZE output. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Oleg Bartunov
Subject Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Include planning time in EXPLAIN ANALYZE output.
Date
Msg-id CAF4Au4xzVdWsFrgAH=wHA=cD3AU3N4iKvMZjQK3PAxaR9=YooQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Include planning time in EXPLAIN ANALYZE output.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I found a bit confusing, when planning time is greater total time, so
+1 for execution time.

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 3:35 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>> Where are we on this?  I still see:
>
>>       test=> EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT 1;
>>                                            QUERY PLAN
>>       ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>        Result  (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.001..0.001 rows=1 loops=1)
>>        Planning time: 0.009 ms
>> -->    Total runtime: 0.009 ms
>>       (3 rows)
>
> There seemed to be a clear majority of votes in favor of changing it to
> say "Execution time".  Robert was arguing for no change, but I don't think
> that's tenable in view of the fact that the addition of the "Planning
> time" line is already a change, and one that makes the old wording
> confusing.
>
> I'll go change it.
>
>                         regards, tom lane
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "sure.postgres"
Date:
Subject: Re: The question about the type numeric
Next
From: Etsuro Fujita
Date:
Subject: Re: Question about optimising (Postgres_)FDW