Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRBuj_DfHPKeTBYsmqMux8VCcAJ0Qb+gpWoioFNcZzfJbA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting  (Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz>)
List pgsql-hackers


2017-01-28 17:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> Now EXPLAIN ANALYZE produce too wide rows for usage in presentations

> What do you think about possibility to implement >>optional<< alternative
> formatting.
> Now:
>   node name (estimation) (actual)
> Alternative:
>   node name (estimation)
>                    (actual)

Seems like that would make a difference in only a tiny minority of
situations.  In a deeply nested plan you'll have trouble no matter
what, and it's not uncommon that the node name line isn't the widest
thing anyway.

It is related to presentation where you have to use large type - and where usually don't present complex nested plans, or you present only fragments.

A output of EXPLAIN is usually ok - EXPLAIN ANALYZE does a overflow 

This feature is in nice to have category - probably interesting for lectures or presenters only - can helps and doesn't need lot of work. So I am ask for community opinion.

The result should not be exactly how I proposed - any form what is more friendly for tiny monitor (projectors) is welcome

Regards

Pavel
 

                        regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Removing link-time cross-module refs in contrib
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba_file_settings view patch