From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Mary Edie Meredith <maryedie(at)osdl(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, osdldbt-general <osdldbt-general(at)lists(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] how to get accurate values in pg_statistic (continued) |
Date: | 2003-09-05 18:38:15 |
Message-ID: | 7126.1062787095@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Mary Edie Meredith <maryedie(at)osdl(dot)org> writes:
> For our testing purposes, however, consistent results are extremely
> important. We have observed that small difference in one plan for one of
> 22 queries can cause a difference in the DBT-3 results. If this
> happens, a small change in performance runs between two Linux kernels
> may appear to be due to the kernels, when in fact it is due to the plan
> change.
Fair enough. If you are trying to force exactly repeatable results,
why don't you just "set seed = 0" before you ANALYZE? There's only
one random-number generator, so that should force ANALYZE to make the
same random sampling every time.
Also, it'd be a good idea to ANALYZE the needed tables by name,
explicitly, to ensure that they are analyzed in a known order
rather than whatever order ANALYZE happens to find them in pg_class.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2003-09-05 19:37:12 | Re: [PERFORM] Seq scan of table? |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2003-09-05 18:20:18 | Re: [PERFORM] Seq scan of table? |