On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 12:09:41AM +0100, Guillaume Smet wrote:
> Could you try to see if the GIN implementation of pg_trgm is faster in
> your cases?
I'm sorry, I can no longer remember where I needed pg_trgm. Simple testing of
your patch seems to indicate that the GiN version is about 65% _slower_ (18ms
vs. 30ms) for a test data set I found lying around, but I remember that on
the data set I needed it, the GIST version was a lot slower than that (think
3-400ms). The 18 vs. 30ms test is a random Amarok database, on 8.2.3
Sorry I couldn't be of more help.
/* Steinar */
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2007-02-24 00:56:22|
|Subject: Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching
|Previous:||From: Guillaume Smet||Date: 2007-02-23 23:09:41|
|Subject: Re: pg_trgm performance|