Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks

Joe Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> As long as we allocate the full length for the funcarg and name types,
>> we are going to have performance/space issues with increasing them,
>> especially since we are looking at doubling or quadrupling those values.
>>
>> You can say that the test below isn't a representative benchmark, but I
>> am sure it is typical of _some_ of our users, so it may still be a
>> significant test.  We don't get good benchmark numbers by accident.  It
>> is this type of analysis that keeps us sharp.
>
>
> I'm running the OSDB benchmark right now. So far the Single user test
> results are done, and the overall results is like this:
>
> NAMEDATALEN = 32, FUNC_MAX_ARGS = 32
> "Single User Test"      2205.89 seconds (0:36:45.89)
>
> NAMEDATALEN = 128, FUNC_MAX_ARGS = 32
> "Single User Test"      2256.16 seconds (0:37:36.16)
>
> So the difference in performance for this benchmark is not nearly so
> large, more like 2%. The multi-user portion of the second test is
> running right now, so I'll report final results in the morning. I might
> also run this on the same machine against 7.2.1 to see where we would
> stand in comparison to the last release. But that won't happen until
> tomorrow some time.
>

Here's the multi-user test summary. Very little difference. The details
of the OSDB output are attached.

NAMEDATALEN = 32, FUNC_MAX_ARGS = 32
"Multi-User Test"       3403.84 seconds (0:56:43.84)

NAMEDATALEN = 128, FUNC_MAX_ARGS = 32
"Multi-User Test"       3412.18 seconds (0:56:52.18)

Joe