Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Explain buffers display units.

From: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Explain buffers display units.
Date: 2010-02-16 16:35:30
Message-ID: 407d949e1002160835v79521e2j31a3f0f92e44fe2c@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> Greg Stark escribi├│:
>>> Oops. Well, I would like to know if I'm in the minority and have to
>>> roll this back before I fix that.
>
>> My personal opinion is that displaying number of blocks in all EXPLAIN
>> formats is more consistent.
>
> FWIW, I vote for number of blocks too.  I tend to see those numbers as
> more indicative of number of I/O requests than amount of memory used.

Ok, that's 3:1 against.

I suspect we'll revisit this once you see all the other
instrumentation I plan for 9.1. It will be much easier to make sense
of all the numbers in consistent units. But we'll see then.

I won't be able to do the rollback until about 11pm EST again today.


-- 
greg

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-02-16 17:05:42
Subject: Re: buildfarm breakage
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2010-02-16 16:22:31
Subject: Re: OpenVMS?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group