On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Jay Levitt <jay.lev...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So my pre-built 9.1.2 takes 434s, my source-built 9.2 takes 509s, and
> (probably both of our) 9.1-HEAD takes 1918s... is that something to worry
> about, and if so, are there any tests I can run to assist? That bug doesn't
> affect me personally, but y'know, community and all that.  Also, I wonder if
> it's something like "9.2 got way faster doing X, but meanwhile, HEAD got way
> slower doing Y.", and this is a canary in the coal mine.

This might be a lame hypothesis, but... is it possible that you built
your 9.1-tip binaries with --enable-cassert?  Or with different
optimization options?

There's been some work done on GiST in 9.2, which as Alexander
Korotkov who did the work mentioned upthread, might have some issue.
But I can't see how there can be a 4x regression between minor
releases, though maybe it wouldn't hurt to test.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to