| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks |
| Date: | 2002-08-05 23:08:40 |
| Message-ID: | 3D4F0578.9030709@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, in fact it's not just a question of disk space.
>
> The following numbers are stats for total elapsed time of "make
> installcheck" over ten trials:
>
<snip>
> I'm not sure about the trend of increasing standard deviation --- that
> may reflect more disk I/O being done, and perhaps more checkpoints
> occurring during the test. But in any case it's clear that there's a
> nontrivial runtime cost here. Does a 10% slowdown bother you?
Hmmm -- didn't Neil do some kind of test that had different results,
i.e. not much performance difference? I wonder if the large number of
DDL commands in installcheck doesn't skew the results against longer
NAMEDATALEN compared to other benchmarks?
# pwd
/opt/src/pgsql/src/test/regress/sql
# grep -i 'CREATE\|DROP' * | wc -l
1114
Joe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-05 23:46:03 | Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks |
| Previous Message | Larry Rosenman | 2002-08-05 22:01:03 | PL/Perl? |