From: | "Alex Hunsaker" <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Need more reviewers! |
Date: | 2008-09-04 23:10:22 |
Message-ID: | 34d269d40809041610n5142d748p359c822627e4e09b@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I think what the hash index patch really needs is some performance
> testing. I'm willing to take responsibility for the code being okay
> or not, but I haven't got any production-grade hardware to do realistic
> performance tests on. I'd like to see a few more scenarios tested than
> the one provided so far: in particular, wide vs narrow index keys and
> good vs bad key distributions.
> If anyone is willing to do comparative performance testing, I'll
> volunteer to make up two variant patches that do it both ways and
> are otherwise equivalent.
I can happily through some hardware at this. Although
"production-grade" is in the eye of the beholder...
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-04 23:11:28 | Re: hash index improving v3 |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-09-04 22:31:15 | Re: [HACKERS] TODO item: Implement Boyer-Moore searching (First time hacker) |