| From: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PoC: Partial sort |
| Date: | 2014-02-19 18:39:40 |
| Message-ID: | CABRT9RCVU3JWeotE-E8RNS0zu4Nqh5Qchm5Q404ZR--u-tt7Bw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:54 PM, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> wrote:
> With partial-sort-basic-1 and this fix on the same test suite, the
> planner overhead is now a more manageable 0.5% to 1.3%; one test is
> faster by 0.5%.
Ping, Robert or anyone, does this overhead seem bearable or is that
still too much?
Do these numbers look conclusive enough or should I run more tests?
> I think the 1st patch now has a bug in initial_cost_mergejoin; you
> still pass the "presorted_keys" argument to cost_sort, making it
> calculate a partial sort cost
Ping, Alexander?
Regards,
Marti
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2014-02-19 18:41:06 | Re: Fwd: patch: make_timestamp function |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-02-19 18:31:06 | Re: Changeset Extraction v7.6.1 |