Re: So why is EXPLAIN printing only *plan* time?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: So why is EXPLAIN printing only *plan* time? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 26286.1398633409@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: So why is EXPLAIN printing only *plan* time? (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: So why is EXPLAIN printing only *plan* time?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> I'd been a bit suspicious of the recent patch to add $SUBJECT
>> without the other pre-execution components, but it just now
>> occurred to me that there's at least one reason why this might
>> be a significant omission: any delay caused by waiting to acquire
>> locks on the query's tables will be spent in the parser.
> Having a distinction between "time spent waiting on locks" (even
> just "waited on locks" as a boolean) would be very nice, imv. Having
> the time spent would be best, provided it doesn't add too much.
We've already got log_lock_waits. I'm not that eager to try to make
EXPLAIN print the same info, and even if I was, it would be a large and
invasive patch. The concern I had here was just that if an EXPLAIN does
get delayed by parse-time lock waits, it'd be nice if the printed times
added up to something approaching the observed runtime.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: