| From: | Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Güttler <guettliml(at)thomas-guettler(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>, "Peter J(dot) Holzer" <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Script which shows performance of ByteA: ascii vs binary |
| Date: | 2019-03-22 12:40:28 |
| Message-ID: | CA+bJJbwSHN=ryg9tAuQM8esEJ-OOfO9+ocA4ZL1fvRNv-kiOEA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Thomas:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 11:22 AM Thomas Güttler
<guettliml(at)thomas-guettler(dot)de> wrote:
> Thank you for asking several times for a benchmark.
> I wrote it now and it is visible: inserting random bytes into bytea is much slower,
> if you use the psycopg2 defaults.
> Here is the chart:
> https://github.com/guettli/misc/blob/master/bench-bytea-inserts-postrgres.png
> And here is the script which creates the chart:
> https://github.com/guettli/misc/blob/master/bench-bytea-inserts-postrgres.py
I'm not too sure, but I read ( in the code ) you are measuring a
nearly not compressible urandom data againtst a highly compressible (
'x'*i ) data,
are you sure the difference is not due to data being compressed and
generating much less disk usage in toast-tables/wal?
Francisco Olarte.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kenneth Marshall | 2019-03-22 12:48:32 | Re: Script which shows performance of ByteA: ascii vs binary |
| Previous Message | Steve Atkins | 2019-03-22 12:04:29 | Re: Forks of pgadmin3? |
