Derby
  1. Derby
  2. DERBY-4896

Would like more detail on what PlanExporter means by the term "advanced"

    Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: Minor Minor
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: 10.7.1.1
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: Documentation, Tools
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      1) The PlanExporter documentation uses the term "advanced style sheets". It would good to say something more about what we mean by "advanced". Does "advanced" just mean that the style sheet can contain javascript? If so, it would be good to say so.

      2) Derby supplies two "advanced" style sheets. I think it is worth saying something about what these style sheets do for you. Perhaps something as simple as this: "Derby supplies two advanced style sheets which use javascript to expand and collapse the details of query plan nodes."

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Bryan Pendleton added a comment -

          Perhaps "alternate" would be better than "advanced"? I think the basic notion is that
          you can use the style sheets that are pre-packaged with Derby, or you can write
          your own. I don't think we place any restrictions on what you can put in your style
          sheets, so they can be as simple or as advanced as you wish.

          Show
          Bryan Pendleton added a comment - Perhaps "alternate" would be better than "advanced"? I think the basic notion is that you can use the style sheets that are pre-packaged with Derby, or you can write your own. I don't think we place any restrictions on what you can put in your style sheets, so they can be as simple or as advanced as you wish.
          Hide
          Rick Hillegas added a comment -

          Thanks for that quick response, Bryan. If "advanced" just means "alternate", does that mean that there is no longer any need for the -adv switch? The documentation in the Tools guide (http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/dev/tools/tools-single.html#ctoolsusingplanexp) indicates that you can you an alternate style sheet by specifying these switches:

          -xsl $styleSheet -html $htmlOutput

          It goes on to say that you can generate advanced output by throwing an additional switch:

          -adv -xsl $styleSheet -xml $xmlOutput

          I notice that the following combination of switches gives me a usage diagnostic:

          -xsl $styleSheet -xml $xmlOutput

          So "advanced" may have something to do with whether you are generating html or xml output.

          Show
          Rick Hillegas added a comment - Thanks for that quick response, Bryan. If "advanced" just means "alternate", does that mean that there is no longer any need for the -adv switch? The documentation in the Tools guide ( http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/dev/tools/tools-single.html#ctoolsusingplanexp ) indicates that you can you an alternate style sheet by specifying these switches: -xsl $styleSheet -html $htmlOutput It goes on to say that you can generate advanced output by throwing an additional switch: -adv -xsl $styleSheet -xml $xmlOutput I notice that the following combination of switches gives me a usage diagnostic: -xsl $styleSheet -xml $xmlOutput So "advanced" may have something to do with whether you are generating html or xml output.
          Hide
          Bryan Pendleton added a comment -

          This part of the tool seems like it could do with some cleanup. It feels like the argument
          syntax is a bit muddled, and looking at the argument processing code it seems like
          it could be simplified. The code seems to want to know more about the type of output
          that is being produced than it should need to know.

          Naively, it seems like all we ought to need to specify to the PlanExporter is "what plan to
          export", "where to put it", and, optionally, "which stylesheet to run to emit the desired output".

          For the time being, though (10.7), we should probably just try to document the current
          behavior as clearly as we can, and we can refine the tool's behavior down the road.

          Show
          Bryan Pendleton added a comment - This part of the tool seems like it could do with some cleanup. It feels like the argument syntax is a bit muddled, and looking at the argument processing code it seems like it could be simplified. The code seems to want to know more about the type of output that is being produced than it should need to know. Naively, it seems like all we ought to need to specify to the PlanExporter is "what plan to export", "where to put it", and, optionally, "which stylesheet to run to emit the desired output". For the time being, though (10.7), we should probably just try to document the current behavior as clearly as we can, and we can refine the tool's behavior down the road.
          Hide
          Kim Haase added a comment -

          Changing priority to minor (since PlanExporter is on the back burner) and adding Tools as a component, since changes to the tool are proposed that would then affect documentation.

          Show
          Kim Haase added a comment - Changing priority to minor (since PlanExporter is on the back burner) and adding Tools as a component, since changes to the tool are proposed that would then affect documentation.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              Rick Hillegas
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              1 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:

                Development