On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes: >> Greg Stark escribió: >>> Oops. Well, I would like to know if I'm in the minority and have to >>> roll this back before I fix that. > >> My personal opinion is that displaying number of blocks in all EXPLAIN >> formats is more consistent. > > FWIW, I vote for number of blocks too. I tend to see those numbers as > more indicative of number of I/O requests than amount of memory used.
Ok, that's 3:1 against. I suspect we'll revisit this once you see all the other instrumentation I plan for 9.1. It will be much easier to make sense of all the numbers in consistent units. But we'll see then. I won't be able to do the rollback until about 11pm EST again today. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
