From: | Dennis Gearon <gearond(at)cvc(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Mike Castle <dalgoda(at)ix(dot)netcom(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: qsort (was Re: Solaris) |
Date: | 2003-05-02 05:10:28 |
Message-ID: | 3EB1FDC4.5191D826@cvc.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
The trend has been approx:
On Linux
BSD qsort is 30-55% faster on average.
On Non Liux
BSD qsor it 50-90% on average.
This kind of says that Linux is doing something right in the kernal,
outdoing mainframe software in this sort of thing.
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
>
> I prevailed on some friends to try out a non Redhat distro plus HPUX 10.20 :
>
> 1 United Linux 1.0 (x86 Linux 2.4.19 )
>
> Value (i = index) BSD GLIBC (seconds)
> random() * mod 0.35 0.56
> i % mod 0.14 0.41
> i / (ITEMS / mod) 0.10 0.27
> i ^ 0x5555555 0.26 0.42
>
> 2 HPUX 10.20 (pa-risc1.1 D380 )
>
> Value (i = index) BSD HPUX (seconds)
> random() * mod 8.3 14.0
> i % mod 2.9 4.9
> i / (ITEMS / mod) 2.4 2.9
> i ^ 0x5555555 7.8 13.8
>
> The HPUX results are interesting !
>
> regards
>
> Mark
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-02 05:31:06 | Re: qsort (was Re: Solaris) |
Previous Message | nolan | 2003-05-02 04:27:11 | Re: Updating a table which is null doesn't work? (fwd) |