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 (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers