Hmmm...It could generate NOTICEs whenever there is a drastic difference in
rowcount or actual time...
On Tue, June 6, 2006 11:29 am, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 11:06:09AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>> it was properly instrumented. That way, the OP might have been able
>>> to discover the root cause himself...
>>
>> I don't think that helps, as it just replaces one uncertainty by
>> another: how far did the EXPLAIN really get towards completion of the
>> plan? You still don't have any hard data.
>
> Well, you _might_ get something useful, if you're trying to work on a
> maladjusted production system, because you get to the part that trips the
> limit, and then you know, "Well, I gotta fix it that far, anyway."
>
> Often, when you're in real trouble, you can't or don't wait for the
> full plan to come back from EXPLAIN ANALYSE, because a manager is helpfully
> standing over your shoulder asking whether you're there yet. Being able
> to say, "Aha, we have the first symptom," might be helpful to users.
> Because the impatient simply won't wait for the
> full report to come back, and therefore they'll end up flying blind
> instead. (Note that "the impatient" is not always the person logged in
> and executing the commands.)
>
> A
>
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
> I remember when computers were frustrating because they *did* exactly what
> you told them to. That actually seems sort of quaint now. --J.D. Baldwin
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
>
