* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > I'm interested, but I need maybe a 1GB data set, or smaller. The > thing that we are benchmarking is the planner, and planning times are > related to the complexity of the database and the accompanying > queries, not the raw volume of data. (It's not size that matters, > it's how you use it?) In fact, in a large database, one could argue > that there is less reason to care about the planner, because the > execution time will dominate anyway. I'm interested in complex > queries in web/OLTP type applications, where you need the query to be > planned and executed in 400 ms at the outside (and preferably less > than half of that).
We prefer that our geocoding be fast... :) Doing 1 state should give
you about the right size (half to 1G of data). I'll try to put together
a good test set this week.
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
