| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hide 'Execution time' in EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) |
| Date: | 2014-06-03 19:48:09 |
| Message-ID: | 20954.1401824889@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> It seems a little weird to call it a "cost" ... but maybe that
>> ship has sailed given how we're treating the planning-time item.
> Maybe we could make it be controlled by TIMING. Seems like it fits
> well-enough there.
Yeah, I thought about that too; but that sacrifices capability in the name
of terminological consistency. The point of TIMING OFF is to not pay the
very high overhead of per-node timing calls ... but that doesn't mean you
don't want the overall runtime. And it might not be convenient to get it
via client-side measurement.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-06-03 19:48:39 | Re: Hide 'Execution time' in EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) |
| Previous Message | Keith Fiske | 2014-06-03 19:46:45 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max |