| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: add_path optimization |
| Date: | 2009-02-03 03:54:55 |
| Message-ID: | 18073.1233633295@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I'm interested, but I need maybe a 1GB data set, or smaller. The
> thing that we are benchmarking is the planner, and planning times are
> related to the complexity of the database and the accompanying
> queries, not the raw volume of data.
In fact, the only reason to care whether there is any data in the DB
*at all* is that you need some realistic content in pg_statistic.
So it should be possible to set up a planner test DB with very little
data bulk, which would surely make testing a lot less painful.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2009-02-03 04:09:55 | Re: How to get SE-PostgreSQL acceptable |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2009-02-03 03:48:45 | Re: add_path optimization |