From: | Ilia Evdokimov <ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
Cc: | 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>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(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: | 2025-01-11 11:10:47 |
Message-ID: | 55695d15-c738-4401-8883-58bc855c9b03@tantorlabs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11.01.2025 12:15, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for your patch, this looks like a very interesting feature that
> I'd like to see in a future release.
>
> It did a quick run: patch OK, make OK, make install OK, but make check
> fails quite a lot on partition_prune.sql.
>
> I guess it would need some work on partition_prune.sql tests and
> perhaps also on the docs.
>
> Thanks again.
>
>
> --
> Guillaume.
Yes, certainly. I have fixed partition_prune.sql. In the documentation
example for EXPLAIN ANALYZE where loops is greater than one, I updated
how 'rows' and 'loops' values are displayed so they appear as decimal
fractions with two digits after the decimal point.
I attached fixed patch.
Any suggestions?
--
Best regards,
Ilia Evdokimov,
Tantor Labs LLC.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v5-0001-Clarify-display-of-rows-and-loops-as-decimal-fraction.patch | text/x-patch | 7.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2025-01-11 12:30:38 | Missing quotes when deparsing XMLTABLE() and SQL/JSON query functions |
Previous Message | Junwang Zhao | 2025-01-11 10:39:00 | Re: Some ExecSeqScan optimizations |