Re: [PERFORMANCE] work_mem vs temp files issue - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [PERFORMANCE] work_mem vs temp files issue
Date
Msg-id 603c8f071001130824u3e0be910lfea14c3e475c8256@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PERFORMANCE] work_mem vs temp files issue  (Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>)
Responses Re: [PERFORMANCE] work_mem vs temp files issue  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Jaime Casanova
<jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, what about when we're just doing EXPLAIN, not EXPLAIN ANALYZE?
>> It'll add another line to the output for the expected number of
>> batches.
>
> and when we are in EXPLAIN ANALYZE the real number as well?

Yeah.  My question is whether it's acceptable to add an extra line to
the EXPLAIN output for every hash join, even w/o ANALYZE.

...Robert

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my server
Next
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my server