Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 07:54:09AM +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
> > Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > > Structure for the human-consumable output or for something that would be
> > > machine-parsed? ISTM it would be best to keep the current output as-is,
> > > and provide some other means for producing machine-friendly output,
> > > presumably in a table format.
> >
> > How about (well-formed) XML format?
> > Anyone menthioned in the past threads?
> >
> > I guess XML is good for the explain structure.
>
> Unless you want to actually analyze the output in something like
> plpgsql, but I can certainly see uses for both. Perhaps getting one
> implimented will make it easier to implement the other.
TODO has:
* Allow EXPLAIN output to be more easily processed by scripts
--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
