Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_trgm performance

From: "Steinar H(dot) Gunderson" <sgunderson(at)bigfoot(dot)com>
To: Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_trgm performance
Date: 2007-02-24 00:31:05
Message-ID: 20070224003105.GA11010@uio.no (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
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
(Debian).

Sorry I couldn't be of more help.

/* Steinar */
-- 
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2007-02-24 00:56:22
Subject: Re: which Xeon processors don't have the context switching problem
Previous:From: Guillaume SmetDate: 2007-02-23 23:09:41
Subject: Re: pg_trgm performance

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group