On 30 December 2011 19:46, Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pe...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: >> * A spreadsheet that shows the results of re-running my earlier heap >> tuple sorting benchmark with this new patch. The improvement in the >> query that orders by 2 columns is all that is pertinent there, when >> considering the value of (1) and the sense in standing still for >> controversy A. >> >> * A spreadsheet that shows the difference in index creation times, >> generated with the help of the new python script. > > very nice. let me save everyone the effort of opening his > spreadsheets (which by the way both show 'HEAD/unoptimized' -- > probably not what you meant): he's showing a consistent ~50% reduction > in running time of sort driven queries -- that's money.
Sorry, I think you may have misinterpreted the results, which is my fault - I introduced a formatting error. In the case of the "btree" spreadsheet, the first query on each sheet should be "create index test on orderlines (prod_id);", and not "select * from orderlines order by prod_id". The idea is to compare the results from each set of binaries across pages of the spreadsheet (note that there are two tabs). You should not compare anything between the two spreadsheets. Revised btree results attached. The heap results that I posted do not have any formatting errors, so they have not been revised. -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers