On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Um ... timings of what? > >> Apologies for being terse, no problem to give a full explanation. > > But you still didn't. I wanted to know what those numbers were and how > they show that there's not a performance regression. Presumably you > meant that some were "before" and some "after", but they were not so > labeled.
All timings were "after" applying the patch. Since all of the tests had very acceptable absolute values I didn't test without-patch. Anyway, looks like we need to bin that and retest with new patch when it comes. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
