Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Simon Riggs wrote: >> My memory says this was eventually removed, even though it was committed >> for a time. Am I wrong? >> - Make EXPLAIN sampling smarter, to avoid excessive sampling delay >> (Martijn van Oosterhout)
> I see a reversion for EXPLAIN ANALYZE only: > date: 2006/06/09 19:30:56; author: tgl; state: Exp; lines: +27 -172 > Revert sampling patch for EXPLAIN ANALYZE; it turns out to be too > unreliable because node timing is much less predictable than the patch > expects. I kept the API change for InstrStopNode, however. > so the item is probably still OK. No, Simon is right, that entry should be removed --- there's nothing interesting left of the patch :-( regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org