Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tM84j-00201S-Oy for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:59:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tM84g-008P7q-IZ for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:59:31 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tM84g-008P2O-2N for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:59:31 +0000 Received: from mail-ej1-x635.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::635]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tM84e-002eGt-DW for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:59:29 +0000 Received: by mail-ej1-x635.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-aa67ac42819so316497866b.0 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2024 07:59:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pgmustard.com; s=google; t=1734105566; x=1734710366; darn=postgresql.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NBbFf3mb574zTQrr+iZhs+rRREwWUyGoHwYt3TEMCoY=; b=Tz0iEEHl9IGGzxvC1l9PEp2gUejVtnzwKSOjd70oeXFz9gDruuSd9SQC7TTKs7O6Q6 5gtkKfkKQ1z/yPDEWw/jPtG5A3+yv+FCaJ/UJMPOFOKDOnDRu2PhdDF2okomDWEdB4DT rN0lUJKmqZLRdqGXkt4QAnTXl5X4OGMYH03UKDajA8nfSal2tcJAHbzjYE0Dms2Frj4L 4pf6o7zS1ep2anaVtfMV9IeEVaCNqo50tjul/Rq4bGb3zYox3WQDnm+cDI/2uCzRdR2F +MFEhfRK0z8SgAQ0iocqZQ9f4auhpIatCWLjThDp/HDGkh60w1dGmkoPoPqVbuMvVZiW gX6Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1734105566; x=1734710366; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=NBbFf3mb574zTQrr+iZhs+rRREwWUyGoHwYt3TEMCoY=; b=KjJS8tBHeQK0WWfFirD3XjHbUhTjgH1TraLXZCDLGbEjCUG8fr0rCRBikfTrmCp2+d CEjfBmvk6yBO1Ld+ndwMZbtS57PI2KflLSpR+qNdkWpcWWlQCgqfYVqehLOKuu7995/v kvK9f96qCLKiA+A4KvykNRgrszwjO/YUfN5VqiAYD0eeL6vYCClwJ2TcsWDbpv7hV71I E1lxPKdgbY9eDKd0qS70Saok8xiLhdTh3gPbM+7emMHKELA/HjueC1WwtG+wTdQDfG/J G6zWNCER+r3tIgbkY5pJQekt5DRl9Dnk73eNMJu/Ab/v163/zDhGBZr1Ldju6jkStRzv F++Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXvtPEhFzjhLfrwrAsSc8ICIJxTNVe9tW+66rwCKOl0xbhDLZhP1kvnzZmJlU3ixB5AohYkVIa17u7x+HOs@postgresql.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyV7pPV4kZbY58EHEkOzWzW/nLqiDfEWByP/szcEWkw1MkRyjlZ GKR2cJJ7VZ2oM3KOjTNo7c5WQEP2vSo7LD+zxrd/Z2KXKgj8u7bx2kr67HomMsWtCRoSKgh8Pqh 5fkEpGe3RcBXkeoyK8850P17242KDxJCltlWIxA== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncv4f/f+Fk2uleMkjZuKq/3Xs+GDrM+gyn7nBNlcsxLmJECjQwao+DQkOe9Nubg 9s/7crQqEaorLvxI3iy06DO/D61XoP/YJikHeP1o= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHJ9hqTKzCu8ps68U6+r1q6oA8BmWonEgkI7UfV1U+aGudDqsRVXieFRDU1P/7j+Gu8grq89OUt65/LI7JUv/o= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:311a:b0:aab:70d3:af43 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-aab779aae4cmr339223666b.27.1734105565638; Fri, 13 Dec 2024 07:59:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3076356.1730831425@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: From: Michael Christofides Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:59:09 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Proposals for EXPLAIN: rename ANALYZE to EXECUTE and extend VERBOSE To: David Rowley Cc: Guillaume Lelarge , Greg Sabino Mullane , Robert Haas , "David G. Johnston" , Nikolay Samokhvalov , Tom Lane , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003e4b57062928ea71" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk --0000000000003e4b57062928ea71 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > I've pushed the main patch. Woohoo! And thank you. I've already seen quite a lot of positivity around the commit on Twitter[1][2][3]. > I'm not planning on pushing the auto_explain.log_buffers default change unless there's a bit more discussion about it. Much like Guillaume, I'd also be in favour of 0002, but it's nowhere near as important to me. I think most people consider the parameters far more when setting up auto_explain, so I believe far fewer omit buffers by mistake. Also, most cloud providers don't ship with auto_explain on, and the only one I know of that does[4], ships with log_buffers on too. On the plus side, it would be nice to be consistent. But on the downside, it might add a little extra overhead for folks who run auto_explain with log_analyze on, and who opted not to set log_buffers and upgrade without setting it to off explicitly. I am still in favour of the 0002 patch being applied, to avoid confusion and maximise the chance people that don't know about buffers still get them in their plans. > do we also need to update doc/src/sgml/rules.sgml? > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/rules-materializedviews.html Good catch. Testing those file_fdw queries locally, I don't see buffers reported by the Foreign Scan, but I do initially see some Planning buffers (on first run). The two plans from the queries on the materialized view do show buffers now though, of course. Since the file_fdw Foreign Scan is not reporting buffers, I'm wondering if in this one case simply changing "With EXPLAIN ANALYZE" to "With EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS OFF)" might be the least confusing solution? Thanks again all, Michael [1]: https://x.com/nori_shinoda/status/1866805465897898319 [2]: https://x.com/samokhvalov/status/1866863468172939457 [3]: https://x.com/mmeent_pg/status/1866796928002044196 [4]: https://www.pgmustard.com/blog/which-cloud-providers-support-auto-explain --0000000000003e4b57062928ea71 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> I've pushed the= main patch.

Woohoo! And thank you. I've already= seen quite a lot of positivity around the commit on Twitter[1][2][3].

> I'm not planning on pushing the auto_explain.= log_buffers default change unless there's a bit more discussion about i= t.

Much like Guillaume, I'd also be in favour = of 0002, but it's nowhere near as important to me. I think most people = consider the parameters far more when setting up auto_explain, so I believe= far fewer omit buffers by mistake. Also, most cloud providers don't sh= ip with auto_explain on, and the only one I know of that does[4], ships wit= h log_buffers on too. On the plus side, it would be nice to be consistent. = But on the downside, it might add a little extra overhead for folks who run= auto_explain with log_analyze on, and who opted not to set log_buffers and= upgrade without setting it to off explicitly. I am still in favour of the = 0002 patch being applied, to avoid confusion and maximise the chance people= that don't know about buffers still get them in their plans.=C2=A0
=
> do we also need to update doc/src/sgml/rules.sgml?

--0000000000003e4b57062928ea71--