> > 10% is nothing. I was expecting this patch would give an order of > > magnitude of improvement or somethine like that in the worst cases of > > the current code (highly unsorted input) > > Yes. It should be x10 faster than ordinary method in the worst cases.
Here's my post with a (very simple) performance test: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-02/msg00766.php The test I used wasn't a "worst case" scenario, since it is based on random data, not wrong-ordered data. Obviously, the real difference can be seen on large tables (5M+ rows), and/or slow disks. Leonardo -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
