public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrei Lepikhov <[email protected]>
To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Ilia Evdokimov <[email protected]>
Cc: Matheus Alcantara <[email protected]>
Cc: Guillaume Lelarge <[email protected]>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
Cc: Ibrar Ahmed <[email protected]>
Cc: Gregory Stark (as CFM) <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
Cc: vignesh C <[email protected]>
Cc: David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 21:19:28 +0100
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+Tgmobgkh5CW=4Xpejw9nR6Onv8SZh0nnr+=HmNAFyyHZb0eg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+TgmoZv8DvmeQHQAX+rkn68id2N+DoUhFZB36d-_w1tyAeqeA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALtqXTfM3GJbFsB63ajfHcYvFhUA0ySX4f4MVS3Dau2vopU+Rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM-w4HNLRO8QJvF3x13wjjdkJHobORxaKrcuyF1cKaTiXuvDbA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALtqXTcZE6YW=m9ZmNU6sRJ+RTC15NFc__foP1S2KaWvGOf6JA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAECtzeVpocPwcQ0ccrXsmcvH_8YkJBdUfsJCzb8NKrEodmCg_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAFY6G8f6Sdu9cvfF2NYWWZMHD0ecTCPuNT7VktPH5NwxY7hcog@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAFY6G8dgp494Xi2+VUUyM2CvuSQ+3nnzWi44gURWbCHjEWW89g@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CA+Tgmobgkh5CW=4Xpejw9nR6Onv8SZh0nnr+=HmNAFyyHZb0eg@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/2/2025 00:41, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 12:14 PM Andrei Lepikhov <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Moreover, switching to a floating-point type for row explanations in
>> each parameterised node would provide a more comprehensive view and add
>> valuable information about the parameterisation of the node, which may
>> not be immediately apparent.
> 
> I agree strongly with all of this. I believe we should just implement
> what was agreed here:
> 
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/21013.1243618236%40sss.pgh.pa.us
> 
> Let's just display 2 fractional digits when nloops>1, else 0, and call it good.
Why are there only two fractional digits?

I reviewed the user reports where we identified issues without 
sufficient data, based on explains only, and typical examples included 
loop numbers ranging from 1E5 to 1E7 and tuples from 1E2 to 1E5. 
Therefore, it may make sense to display fractional digits up to two 
meaningful (non-zero) digits.

-- 
regards, Andrei Lepikhov






view thread (26+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox