Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16
Date: 2023-05-19 23:04:38
Message-ID: 20230519230438.e6rskh3yjz3mutm2@awork3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2023-05-19 15:44:09 -0700, MARK CALLAGHAN wrote:
> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 10:36 AM MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 10:01 PM MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >> I have two more runs of the benchmark in progress so we will have 3
> >> results for each of the test cases to confirm that the small regressions
> >> are repeatable.
> >>
> >
> I repeated the benchmark a few times using a more recent PG16 build (git
> sha 08c45ae2) and have yet to see any significant changes. So that is good
> news. My testing scripts have been improved so I should be able to finish
> the next round of tests in less time.

With "yet to see any significant changes" do you mean that the runs are
comparable with earlier runs, showing the same regression? Or that the
regression vanished? Or ...?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-05-19 23:05:12 Re: PG 16 draft release notes ready
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-05-19 22:57:17 Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction