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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 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 > >
