| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pg noob <pgnube(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: postgres 9.2 |
| Date: | 2013-08-28 16:11:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1z-auXDCU34gxzKv=KuGMBp9zpsC0Jg2f+LxfOFA9dWNg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:26 PM, pg noob <pgnube(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I recently ran a couple of tests where I took one of my production
> systems and did a drop-in replacement of postgres 8.4 with 9.2.4.
> I was expecting to see some performance improvement given the release
> notes describing 9.2 as a "largely performance related release".
>
> At least for my application, which is an embedded postgresql install
> with a relatively small number of client connections, I'm not seeing much
> of a measurable difference at all.
There were a bunch of different, specific, performance improvements
each with a focused area. Many of them related to reducing contention
in many-CPU systems. If your system wasn't having problems in the
specific areas that were improved, you wouldn't see an improvement.
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Filip Rembiałkowski | 2013-08-28 18:26:59 | 9.0 hot standby, consistent recovery state question |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2013-08-28 15:38:03 | Re: postgres 9.2 |