| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions |
| Date: | 2016-02-18 00:00:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTa0UnvoES7tdo3v6pJd7LE9gVE8q+158X=gtJ-NO861A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
>> \set aid 1 + 1
>> pgbench -f addition.sql -t 50000000
>>
>> I have the following:
>> HEAD: 3.5~3.7M TPS
>> list method: 3.6~3.7M TPS
>> array method: 3.4~3.5M TPS
>> So all approaches have a comparable performance.
>
> Yep, the execution trace is pretty similar in all cases, maybe with a little
> more work for the array method, although I'm surprise that the difference is
> discernable.
Nah, that's mostly noise I think. My conclusion is that all approaches
are rather equivalent for the operators.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2016-02-18 00:23:07 | Re: Figures in docs |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2016-02-17 23:45:52 | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |