On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 2:22 PM Yuya Watari <watari.y...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 4. Discussion > > First of all, tables 1, 2 and the figure attached to this email show > that likely and unlikely do not have the effect I expected. Rather, > tables 3, 4, 5 and 6 imply that they can have a negative effect on > queries A and B. So it is better to remove these likely and unlikely. > > For the design change, the benchmark results show that it may cause > some regression, especially for smaller sizes. However, Figure 1 also > shows that the regression is much smaller than its variance. This > design change is intended to improve code maintainability. The > regression is small enough that I think these results are acceptable. > What do you think about this? > > [1] > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJ2pMkZk-Nr=yckrgfglu35gk-d179qpyxaqtjmuko86y1n...@mail.gmail.com > [2] > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/caj2pmkyckhfbd_omusvyhysqu0-j9t6nz0pl6pwbzsucohw...@mail.gmail.com > Hi Yuya, For one of the earlier versions, I had reported a large memory consumption in all cases and increase in planning time for Assert enabled builds. How does the latest version perform in those aspects? -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat
