> Sure, and the DevOps staff would be using the EXPLAIN feature (if we had > it). After which they could do little anyway except complain to the ORM > authors, who might or might not give a damn. I don't see that there's > enough value-added from what you suggest to justify the development > time.
You're still thinking of a schema change as a SQL script. ORM-based applications usually do not run their schema changes as SQL scripts, thus there's nothing to EXPLAIN. Anything which assumes the presense of a distict, user-accessible SQL script is going to leave out a large class of our users. However, as I said, if we had the EXPLAIN ALTER, we could use auto-explain to log the ALTER plans (finally, a good use for auto-explain). So that's a workable workaround. And EXPLAIN ALTER would offer us more flexibility than any logging option, of course. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
