On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:54 PM, Marti Raudsepp <ma...@juffo.org> wrote:
> With partial-sort-basic-1 and this fix on the same test suite, the
> planner overhead is now a more manageable 0.5% to 1.3%; one test is
> faster by 0.5%.

Ping, Robert or anyone, does this overhead seem bearable or is that
still too much?

Do these numbers look conclusive enough or should I run more tests?

> I think the 1st patch now has a bug in initial_cost_mergejoin; you
> still pass the "presorted_keys" argument to cost_sort, making it
> calculate a partial sort cost

Ping, Alexander?


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

Reply via email to