From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Expose options to explain? (track_io_timing) |
Date: | 2014-10-14 17:04:00 |
Message-ID: | 543D5780.3040402@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/14/2014 10:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Hmm. IIRC, there are only two use cases for I/O timing at present:
> pg_stat_statements (which really only makes sense if it's turned on or
> off system-wide) and EXPLAIN. Rather than inventing more GUC
> machinery, I think we could just add an explain flag called "IO". So
> you could do:
>
> EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, IO) SELECT ....
>
> And that would gather I/O stats even if it's turned off system-wide.
> Or you could do:
>
> EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, IO false) SELECT ....
>
> That can't really be allowed to suppress gathering the I/O stats for
> this query if the sysadmin wants those stats for all queries. But it
> could suppress the print-out.
I think the first one makes the most sense.
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, @cmdpromptinc
"If we send our children to Caesar for their education, we should
not be surprised when they come back as Romans."
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lucas Lersch | 2014-10-14 17:10:57 | Re: Buffer Requests Trace |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-10-14 17:02:12 | Re: Buffer Requests Trace |