> On top of that, if you did want YAML for easier readability, what > aspect of the output is more readable in YAML than it is in text > format? The only answer I can think of is that you like having each > data element on a separate line, so that the plan is much longer but > somewhat narrower. But if that's what you want, the JSON output is > almost as good - the only difference is a bit of extra punctuation.
"almost as good" ... I agree with Kevin that it's more readable. The whole patch just adds 144 lines. It doesn't look to me like there's significant maintenance burden involved, but of course I need to defer to the more experienced. It's even possible that we could reduce the size of the patch still further if we really looked at it as just a differently punctuated JSON. Having compared the JSON and YAML output formats, I think having YAML as a 2nd human-readable format might be valuable, even though it adds nothing to machine-processing. Again, if there were a sensible way to do YAML as a contrib module, I'd go for that, but there isn't. --Josh Berkus -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
