Re: SELECT constant; takes 15x longer on 9.0?
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SELECT constant; takes 15x longer on 9.0? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | n2k162867791004061255ia4f8647cr6e1e7df5083923b1@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SELECT constant; takes 15x longer on 9.0? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: SELECT constant; takes 15x longer on 9.0?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2010/4/6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > "David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com> writes: >> On Apr 6, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Huh. I'm still curious, because in my test the overhead of those >>> options seemed to be about 3x. So there's still something considerably >>> different between what you did and what I did. > >> Are you doing this on a Mac? > > I hadn't, but since you mention it: 100000 iterations take about 7.5sec > with non-assert CVS HEAD and 15sec with asserts, on a 2008 Macbook Pro. > Color me still confused. it is little bit offtopic. Can we add info about assertation to version() output? like postgres=# select version(); version ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── ───────────────────────────────PostgreSQL 9.0alpha4 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC) 4.4.3 2010 0127 (Red Hat 4.4.3-4), 32-bit >>> with enabled assertation <<<< (1 row) Regards Pavel Stehule > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: