On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I've committed the core of this. I left out the stats collector >> stuff, because it's still per-table and I think perhaps we should back >> off to just per-database. I changed it so that it does not conflate >> wait time with I/O time. Maybe there should be a separate method of >> measuring wait time, but I don't think it's a good idea for the >> per-backend stats to measure a different thing than what gets reported >> up to the stats collector - we should have ONE definition of each >> counter. I also tweaked the EXPLAIN output format a bit, and the >> docs. > > Maybe I missed some earlier discussoin -- I've been having trouble > keeping up with the lists. > > But was there discussion of why this is a GUC? Why not just another > parameter to EXPLAIN like the others? > i.e. EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS, IOTIMING)
Because you want to be able to expose the data even for queries that aren't explained. Right now, you can do that with pg_stat_statements; and the original patch also had per-table counters, but I didn't commit that part due to some concerns about stats bloat. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
