| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alena Rybakina <a(dot)rybakina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ilia Evdokimov <ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: explain analyze rows=%.0f |
| Date: | 2025-03-06 23:32:06 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmob2FcdNQnfv20hFHMiQjqsmak4NnkmxjNQnNpzzbowmgQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 4:18 PM Alena Rybakina <a(dot)rybakina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> To be honest, I initially took it as the total number of tuples and
> couldn't figure out for myself how to interpret the result - 0 tuples or
> 1 tuple in the end. Maybe it wasn't quite correct to perceive it that
> way, but Matthias's explanation helped me figure out the reason why such
> a strange result was obtained, although it's not usual to see it.
Yeah, I thought the same back when I first started using PostgreSQL
and had to learn that it wasn't the case. I still think that's what we
*should* be displaying -- I think dividing by nloops obscures the data
users actually want. But it would admittedly be a pretty big
compatibility break at this point, and at least if we display a couple
of decimal places it's more possible to approximate the undivided
value.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2025-03-06 23:39:44 | Re: [PATCH] pg_stat_activity: make slow/hanging authentication more visible |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2025-03-06 23:29:37 | Re: Statistics Import and Export |