>>> # and look at latency:
>>> # no parts = 0.071 ms
>>> # 1 hash = 0.071 ms (did someone optimize this case?!)
>>> # 2 hash ~ 0.126 ms (+ 0.055 ms)
>>> # 50 hash ~ 0.155 ms
>>> # 100 hash ~ 0.178 ms
>>> # 150 hash ~ 0.232 ms
>>> # 200 hash ~ 0.279 ms
>>> # overhead ~ (0.050 + [0.0005-0.0008] * nparts) ms
>>
>> It is linear?
>
> Good question. I would have hoped affine, but this is not very clear on these
> data, which are the median of about five runs, hence the bracket on the slope
> factor. At least it is increasing with the number of partitions. Maybe it
> would be clearer on the minimum of five runs.
Here is a fellow up.
On the minimum of all available runs the query time on hash partitions is
about:
0.64375 nparts + 118.30979 (in µs).
So the overhead is about 47.30979 + 0.64375 nparts, and it is indeed
pretty convincingly linear as suggested by the attached figure.
--
Fabien.
