Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f

From: Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ilia Evdokimov <ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com>, Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97(at)gmail(dot)com>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark(dot)cfm(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f
Date: 2025-02-12 19:55:53
Message-ID: 0e4c813a-18eb-41e2-8edb-89b78d43c82d@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 13/2/2025 01:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> I was idly speculating yesterday about letting the Ryu code print
> the division result, so that we get a variable number of digits.
> Realistically, that'd probably result in many cases in more digits
> than anybody wants, so it's not a serious proposal. I'm cool with
> the fixed-two-digits approach to start with.
Okay, since no one else voted for the meaningful-numbers approach, I
would say that fixed size is better than nothing. It may cover some of
my practical cases, but unfortunately, not the most problematic ones.

--
regards, Andrei Lepikhov

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2025-02-12 19:56:09 Re: Add -k/--link option to pg_combinebackup
Previous Message Robert Haas 2025-02-12 19:54:50 Re: Add -k/--link option to pg_combinebackup