Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Isn't the whole point of EXPLAIN to expose implementation artifacts in
> the first place?
Touche ... I withdraw the complaint.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make
Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
It turns out you cannot EXPLAIN on CREATE TABLE AS, but it seems to work
fine if I extend the grammar as below:
This seems to me to be something that will look like a wart, not a
feature, from the user's point of view. You can't exp
Le jeudi 23 octobre 2008, Tom Lane a écrit :
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It turns out you cannot EXPLAIN on CREATE TABLE AS, but it seems to work
> > fine if I extend the grammar as below:
>
> This seems to me to be something that will look like a wart, not a
> feature, from
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It turns out you cannot EXPLAIN on CREATE TABLE AS, but it seems to work
> fine if I extend the grammar as below:
This seems to me to be something that will look like a wart, not a
feature, from the user's point of view. You can't explain CREATE TAB
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 14:29 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> It turns out you cannot EXPLAIN on CREATE TABLE AS, but it seems to work
> fine if I extend the grammar as below:
Yes please.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
--
Sent via pgs
It turns out you cannot EXPLAIN on CREATE TABLE AS, but it seems to work
fine if I extend the grammar as below:
ExplainableStmt:
SelectStmt
| InsertStmt
| UpdateStmt
| DeleteStmt
| DeclareCursorStmt
+ | CreateAsStmt
| ExecuteStmt
