Horton

Re: Proposal: Progressive explain

Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com>
To: torikoshia <torikoshia@oss.nttdata.com>, Rafael Thofehrn Castro <rafaelthca@gmail.com>, robertmhaas@gmail.com
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-03-31T06:24:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Add some new hooks so extensions can add details to EXPLAIN.

On 3/31/25 02:23, torikoshia wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 6:43 AM Rafael Thofehrn Castro 
>> Implemented this version. New patch has the following characteristics:
> 
> 
> I haven't looked into the code yet, but when I ran below commands during 
> make installcheck, there was an error and an assertion failure
> 
>    =# select * from pg_stat_progress_explain;
>    =# \watch 0.1
Yeah, that's to be expected.
I think many corner cases may be found: hash table in the middle of 
filling, opened file descriptors, an incorrect combination of variables, 
  'not yet visited' subtrees - who knows what else? So, last time, I 
just ended up with the idea that using the explain code is a bit 
dangerous - in the middle of execution, it is enough to expose only 
basic data - rows, numbers and timings. It seems safe to gather.

-- 
regards, Andrei Lepikhov