On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 at 17:18, Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > On 12/5/23 08:14, Shlok Kyal wrote: > > Hi, > > > >> As for the test results, I very much doubt the differences are not > >> caused simply by random timing variations, or something like that. And I > >> don't understand what "Performance Machine Linux" is, considering those > >> timings are slower than the other two machines. > > > > The machine has Total Memory of 755.536 GB, 120 CPUs and RHEL 7 Operating > > System > > Also find the detailed info of the performance machine attached. > > > > Thanks for the info. I don't think the tests really benefit from this > much resources, I would be rather surprised if it was faster beyond 8 > cores or so. The CPU frequency likely matters much more. Which probably > explains why this machine was the slowest. > > Also, I wonder how much the results vary between the runs. I suppose you > only did s single run for each, right?
I did 10 runs for each of the cases and reported the median result in the previous thread. I have documented the result of the runs and have attached the same here. Thanks and Regards, Shlok Kyal
Performance_Test.xlsx
Description: MS-Excel 2007 spreadsheet
