I don't thing so differention on speed depends on compilation or other options. I compile 8.0 and 7.4.6 from source today. I didn't use any option for configure. But the difference is too big for optimalizations.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# uname -a Linux stehule.fsv.cvut.cz 2.6.4 #1 SMP Mon Mar 15 17:21:52 CET 2004 i586 i586 i386 GNU/Linux [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# gcc --version gcc (GCC) 3.3 20030715 (Red Hat Linux 3.3-14) I know PostgreSQL is little slowly when started new block BEGIN END now when I use catch exceptions. But in this test isn't any other subblock. Only one cycle and some basic arithmetic operations. On Thu, 13 Jan 2005, Michael Fuhr wrote: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 05:05:00PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > Pavel Stehule <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> And? > > >> > > >> (ie, what test case are you talking about?) > > > > > This test is function for searching max factor. It is speaking only about > > > quality of interpret an language. I would ask why? > > > > So I can replicate your test. > > SELECT delitel(1000000, 1); > > Mean times over the last five of six runs on my poor 500MHz FreeBSD > 4.11-PRERELEASE box: > > 6741 ms 7.4.6 (from FreeBSD ports collection) > 14427 ms 8.0.0rc5 (from CVS source) > > I remembered that I had build 8.0.0rc5 with --enable-debug so I > rebuilt it without that option, not sure if that would make a > difference. The mean time increased by 8% to 15580 ms, which was > opposite from what I expected. I re-ran the 7.4.6 tests and they > came out the same as they had before. > > I'm not sure what optimization flags (if any) the ports build of > 7.4.6 might have used. I can take a closer look if you think it > matters. > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend