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

Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f
Date: 2009-05-29 18:39:23
Message-ID: 603c8f070905291139m44c7a975h4e12d30749c0a6df@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:12:42PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira
>>>> Don't you think is too strange having, for example, 6.67 rows?
>>>
>>> No stranger than having it say 7 when it's really not.  Actually mine
>>> mostly come out 1 when the real value is somewhere between 0.5 and
>>> 1.49.  :-(
>
>> +1. It would help users realize more quickly that some of the values in the
>> EXPLAIN output are, for instance, *average* number of rows *per iteration* of a
>> nested loop, say, rather than total rows found in all loops.
>
> I think it would only be sensible to show fractional digits if nloops is
> greater than 1.  Otherwise the value must in fact be an integer, and
> you're just going to confuse people more by suggesting that it might not
> be.

That might be over-engineering, but I'll take it.

...Robert

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-05-29 18:44:22
Subject: Re: pg_migrator and an 8.3-compatible tsvector data type
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2009-05-29 18:36:45
Subject: Re: pg_migrator and an 8.3-compatible tsvector data type

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