Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 625CC6337FF for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:06:30 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 85255-03 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:06:18 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.226]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 727D96335A2 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:06:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id k40so3286518rvb.43 for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 07:06:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:references:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer :mime-version:subject:date:cc; bh=PXUHgYTdH1YLFh/RkDiJyeDPBl+n8wQh0D9i5C8QsvA=; b=pblRGv1xEolTuSsXhLwQ1eYICTpeg6ckYi4E2lqUopC/N48Pt33FMb/JUHJpbXXxdD /uYbMWO4HHaYhenlbbm2/eox1k2Rxqmq1uo4Jfl0P+QW5c7yiBY2EyfiVN07Gjincxil SCCHSjDIW/MSYTRFaX7JoqZlJdmD1hvtTKPys= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=references:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:mime-version:subject:date:cc; b=s4U8eQLBBqpHYUzvo/CccwNlgjk6lkZRlRbk0wtfb7FKV9vlQ1QGzwf0hgOoWxnIWo O94VHJ55Df7iwjq8nv9o5uFYYck59t8wcATW2PLE1H6UUsBb5SlBtPojNa62EhZi082r WPGl4t1k+aiXeXwLmV5/q6nmCGHyvCo9FbcgM= Received: by 10.141.116.17 with SMTP id t17mr7817961rvm.268.1243951585544; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 07:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.30.127? (static-216-83-108-4.sniparpa.net [216.83.108.4]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f42sm19308474rvb.31.2009.06.02.07.06.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 02 Jun 2009 07:06:24 -0700 (PDT) References: <603c8f070905281830g2e5419c4xad2946d149e21f9d@mail.gmail.com> <4A1F4FD5.7060204@timbira.com> <4A249CE9.6050708@cheapcomplexdevices.com> <1243950060.23910.58.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> Message-Id: From: Robert Haas To: Simon Riggs In-Reply-To: <1243950060.23910.58.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (5H11) Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 5H11) Subject: Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:06:18 -0400 Cc: Ron Mayer , Euler Taveira de Oliveira , "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200906/140 X-Sequence-Number: 139195 On Jun 2, 2009, at 9:41 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 20:30 -0700, Ron Mayer wrote: > >> What I'd find strange about "6.67 rows" in your example is more >> that on >> the estimated rows side, it seems to imply an unrealistically >> precise estimate >> in the same way that "667 rows" would seem unrealistically precise >> to me. >> Maybe rounding to 2 significant digits would reduce confusion? > > You're right that the number of significant digits already exceeds the > true accuracy of the computation. I think what Robert wants to see is > the exact value used in the calc, so the estimates can be checked more > thoroughly than is currently possible. Bingo. ...Robert