Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4D5874D9.2090901@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/12/2011 05:33 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 03:42:17PM -0600, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> In two hours of testing with a 90GB production database, the copy >> patch on top of HEAD ran 0.6% faster than HEAD for pg_dumpall >> (generating identical output files), but feeding that in to and >> empty cluster with psql ran 8.4% faster with the patch than without! >> I'm going to repeat that latter with more attention to whether >> everything made it in OK. (That's not as trivial to check as the >> dump phase.) >> >> Do you see any reason that COPY FROM should be significantly >> *faster* with the patch? > No. Up to, say, 0.5% wouldn't be too surprising, but 8.4% is surprising. What > is the uncertainty of that figure? > > We have seen in the past that changes that might be expected to slow things down slightly can have the opposite effect. For example, see <http://people.planetpostgresql.org/andrew/index.php?/archives/37-Puzzling-results.html> where Tom commented: Yeah, IME it's not unusual for microbenchmark results to move a percent or three in response to any code change at all,even unrelated ones. I suppose it's from effects like critical loops breaking across cache lines differently thanbefore. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: