Re: Abbreviated keys for text cost model fix
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Abbreviated keys for text cost model fix |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZQSDZQL6pQuNdPWb2MqEcX8u4eobD5yMmmW7AYGCByKDg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Abbreviated keys for text cost model fix (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Abbreviated keys for text cost model fix
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > So while it's true that for the 3rd query we get much worse results > compared to the other queries (i.e. we don't get >400% speedup but ~3% > slowdown compared to master), it's true that master performs > exceptionally well for this query with small datasets. Once we get to 2M > rows, the master performance drops significantly but cost-model keeps > the performance characteristics and the speedup jumps back to ~700% > which is nice. > > These numbers are for the 'ASC + unsorted row' test, but I do get > exactly the same pattern for the 'random' tests done previously. Yeah. Looks like you're comparing a case where the old cost model did the right thing anyway (i.e. used abbreviation). The difference would then be entirely explainable as noise. Right? > It would be nice if we could address the 3% regression for the last > query, but I guess it's not a big deal. The numbers in general are > absolutely impressive. Kudos. Thanks. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: