| From: | Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f |
| Date: | 2022-07-08 18:12:47 |
| Message-ID: | CALtqXTfosCrM-7B2HxitSMo8CNPGWOZ+nstwPbAiZVxJ3tfjnA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 10:53 PM Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> > - -> Parallel Seq Scan on tenk1 (actual rows=1960
> loops=50)
> > + -> Parallel Seq Scan on tenk1 (actual rows=1960.00
>
> At the not inconsiderable risk of bike-shedding....
>
> I'm wondering if printing something like 0.00 will be somewhat
> deceptive when the real value is non-zero but less than 1 row per 200
> loops. I wonder if the number of decimal places should be calculated
> to produce a minimum of one non-zero digit for non-zero values.
>
> --
> greg
>
+ -> Parallel Seq Scan on tenk1 (actual rows=1960.00
I have added a new check to remove any ".00" from the output because in
the case of parallel queries we are getting that. Secondly, it is
disturbing many test case outputs.
--
Ibrar Ahmed
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-07-08 18:15:57 | Re: automatically generating node support functions |
| Previous Message | Ibrar Ahmed | 2022-07-08 18:10:31 | Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f |