Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hO32n-00031n-Vn for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 May 2019 16:34:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hO32m-0004BO-0M for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 May 2019 16:34:16 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hO32l-0004A9-N9 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 May 2019 16:34:15 +0000 Received: from xvm-110-146.dc2.ghst.net ([46.226.110.146] helo=fetter.org) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hO32j-0003TG-4S for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Tue, 07 May 2019 16:34:15 +0000 Received: by fetter.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 2E49442BC5; Tue, 7 May 2019 18:34:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 7 May 2019 18:34:11 +0200 From: David Fetter To: Andres Freund Cc: PostgreSQL Development Subject: Re: New EXPLAIN option: ALL Message-ID: <20190507163411.GM28936@fetter.org> References: <20190507073046.GI28936@fetter.org> <20190507154147.l32a3erg4mbycj7u@alap3.anarazel.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190507154147.l32a3erg4mbycj7u@alap3.anarazel.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 08:41:47AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2019-05-07 09:30:47 +0200, David Fetter wrote: > > It can get a little tedious turning on (or off) all the boolean > > options to EXPLAIN, so please find attached a shortcut. > > I'm not convinced this is a good idea - it seems likely that we'll > add conflicting options at some point, and then this will just be a > pain in the neck. I already left out FORMAT for a similar reason, namely that it's not a boolean, so it's not part of flipping on (or off) all the switches. Are you seeing a point in the future where there'd be both mutually exclusive boolean options and no principled reason to choose among them? If so, what might it look like? Best, David. -- David Fetter http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate