Em seg., 10 de fev. de 2025 às 18:14, Ilia Evdokimov <ilya.evdoki...@tantorlabs.com> escreveu: > Sorry for missing your question earlier. If you notice in the code above, the > variable(average) 'rows' is defined as: > > double rows = planstate->instrument->ntuples / nloops; > > This represents the total rows divided by the number of loops. The condition > means that variable 'rows' will always between zero and one. Therefore, the > average rows under such conditions cannot be greater than or even equal to > one. I wrote this condition specifically to avoid the verbose expression > 'rows > 0 && rows < 1'. However, since this might not be obvious to everyone, > perhaps it'd be better to write is using 'rows' directly or add a comment > explaining this logic. > Thanks for the details! It makes sense to me now. I think that adding a comment could be a good idea
> I agree with the last two points. As for the first one—maybe we could > simply state that the average rows value can be decimal, especially for > very small values? > > I'm just not sure about the "small values"; the 'rows' in decimal will only > happen with small values? What would be a "small value" in this context? My > main > point here is more that I think that it would be good to mention *why* the > 'rows' can be decimal, not just describe that it could be decimal. > > > As for 'small values', it means that the average rows is between zero and > one, to avoid rounding errors and misunderstanding. I think this would be > ideal. > Get it, sounds reasonable to me. -- Matheus Alcantara
