On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 3:03 AM, David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> > Well. Unless I miss something it doesn't resolve the problem that >> > started this thread. Namely that it's currently impossible to write >> > regression using EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, TIMING OFF. COSTS OFF). Which is >> > worthwhile because it allows to tests some behaviour that's only visible >> > in actually executed plans (like seing that a subtree wasn't executed). >> >> TBH, I don't particularly care about that. A new flag for turning >> "summary timing" off would answer the complaint with not too much >> non-orthogonality ... but I really don't find this use case compelling >> enough to justify adding a feature to EXPLAIN. >> > Hmm, was my case above not compelling enough?
Apparently not to Tom, but it made sense to me. I think we should find a way to do something about this - maybe making TIMING OFF also suppress that info is the simplest approach. -- 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
