Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] External Sort timing debug statements

2005-10-03 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm not actually involved in this so maybe I'm completely off base here. But > wouldn't you want to know how many tuples are being sorted and how many data > are being written in these runs in order to be able to actually make sense of > these timing measure

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] External Sort timing debug statements

2005-10-03 Thread Greg Stark
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Applied with revisions: I made it use the VacRUsage code so that we > could see both CPU and elapsed time, and moved the report points around > a bit. The output with trace_sort enabled looks like this: > > NOTICE: begin tuple sort: nkeys = 1, workMem = 10