[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes:
> Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) writes:
>>> I have seen no one do peroformance testing of this, so it seems it
>>> will have to wait for 8.4.
>> I didn't have time...
>> (e.g. - we've got a case where dropping the threshold to ~900 bytes
>> would give us a big win for certain databases and tables.)
> How do you know?  Seems like you've got a readymade test case there.

I did some testing with Known Scenario, and found, indeed, that there
was a significant gain to be had.  I documented it at least partially
on March 21...


Unfortunately, the sample query that I used to validate usefulness
isn't one I can share :-(.

More importantly, it's only one test case, and is strongly influenced
by some *very* strong regularity to the patterns of updates that take
place to the table that I looked at.  It's not nearly good enough to
treat as a generalizable case.
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "linuxfinances.info")
MICROS~1 is to quality software what MacDonalds is to gourmet cooking

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not

Reply via email to