Re: EXPLAIN and nfiltered, take two
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>
From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@2ndquadrant.com>, Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-09-22T16:52:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:41:12AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah, I thought seriously about that too. The problem with it is that > you end up having to print that line all the time, whether or not it > adds any knowledge. The "filter removed N rows" approach has the saving > grace that you can leave it out when no filtering is happening. Another > point is that if you have two filters operating at a node, printing only > the starting number of rows doesn't let you disentangle which filter did > how much. I wonder if it would be more useful to print a percentage. If 0% is filtered out you can still drop it but it gives a more useful output if the number of rows is really large. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > He who writes carelessly confesses thereby at the very outset that he does > not attach much importance to his own thoughts. -- Arthur Schopenhauer