On 3/12/25 20:58, Sami Imseih wrote:
>> I think this is a seriously bad idea. The first line is already
>> overloaded; we don't need several different extensions adding more
>> stuff to it.
>
> Fair enough.
>
>> Plus, this doesn't consider what to do in non-text
>> output formats.
>
> the hook will be a no-op for non-text formats, which is not
> desirable behavior. I get that also.
>
> I have no strong feelings for this, but wanted to see what
> others think.
I'm against it. For me, the best model there is to allow extensions to
add something and nothing more. If it wants to change the core explain
code - use ExplainOneQuery_hook instead.
The reason here is to reduce possible competition among extensions.
I already have troubles with conflict on queryid modifications and
potential conflict in the planner_hook - if someone invents another
extension that will provide a plan tree. So, it would be better to
reduce conflicts whenever possible.
--
regards, Andrei Lepikhov
