On Jun 2, 2009, at 9:41 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 20:30 -0700, Ron Mayer wrote:
What I'd find strange about "6.67 rows" in your example is more
that on
the estimated rows side, it seems to imply an unrealistically
precise estimate
in the same way that "667 rows" would seem unrealistically precise
to me.
Maybe rounding to 2 significant digits would reduce confusion?
You're right that the number of significant digits already exceeds the
true accuracy of the computation. I think what Robert wants to see is
the exact value used in the calc, so the estimates can be checked more
thoroughly than is currently possible.
Bingo.
...Robert
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
