Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-30 Thread Jaime Casanova
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Jaime Casanova why not let it go in ANALYZE, just as the sort info It's

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-30 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Jaime Casanova jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec wrote: On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-28 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Jaime Casanova why not let it go in ANALYZE, just as the sort info It's kinda long-winded - it adds like 4 extra lines for each hash join.  I don't

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-24 Thread Guillaume Lelarge
Le 24/01/2010 06:06, Jaime Casanova a écrit : On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: I was also thinking about the possibility of adding a new option called output and making that control whether the Output line gets printed. It's kind of annoying to use

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-24 Thread Greg Stark
isn't that line pretty much the main point of verbose? I would assume anything new like this would get its own option which might default to on. greg On 24 Jan 2010 03:08, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Per recent discussion on pgsql-performance, and per discussion on -hackers that it

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-24 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Jaime Casanova jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec wrote: On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: I was also thinking about the possibility of adding a new option called output and making that control whether the Output line gets

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-24 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Jaime Casanova why not let it go in ANALYZE, just as the sort info It's kinda long-winded - it adds like 4 extra lines for each hash join. I don't think I want to add that much clutter to regular E-A output. Well,

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-24 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Jaime Casanova why not let it go in ANALYZE, just as the sort info It's kinda long-winded - it adds like 4 extra lines for each hash join.  I don't

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-24 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: Care to suggest a format? As much like the sort case as possible ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

[HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-23 Thread Robert Haas
Per recent discussion on pgsql-performance, and per discussion on -hackers that it might not be too late for small patches after all, here is a patch (as yet without documentation) which adds some additional instrumentation to EXPLAIN for hashes: number of buckets, number of batches, original

Re: [HACKERS] further explain changes

2010-01-23 Thread Jaime Casanova
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: I was also thinking about the possibility of adding a new option called output and making that control whether the Output line gets printed.  It's kind of annoying to use EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, VERBOSE) why not let it go in