On Tuesday 08 December 2009 16:23:11 Kevin Grittner wrote: > I wrote: > > Frankly, I'd be amazed if there was a performance regression, > > OK, I'm amazed. While it apparently helps some cases dramatically > (Andres had a case where run time was reduced by 93.2%), I found a > pretty routine case where run time was increased by 3.1%. I tweaked > the code and got that down to a 2.5% run time increase. I'm having > troubles getting it any lower than that. And yes, this is real, not > noise -- the slowest unpatched time for this test is faster than the > fastest time with any version of the patch. :-( > > Andres, could you provide more information on the test which showed > the dramatic improvement? In particular, info on OS, CPU, character > set, encoding scheme, and what kind of data was used for the test. > > I'll do some more testing and try to figure out how the patch is > slowing things down and post with details. Could you show your testcase? I dont see why it could get slower?
I tested with various data, the one benefiting most was some changelog where each entry was signed by an email. OS: Debian Sid, Core2 Duo, UTF-8, and I tried both C and de_DE.UTF8. Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
