| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: procost for to_tsvector |
| Date: | 2015-05-01 14:11:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20150501141157.GK6342@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 10:03:01AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Andrew did the research to support a higher value, but even 10 should
> >> be an improvement over what we have now.
> >
> > Yes, I saw that, but I didn't see him recommend an actual number. Can
> > someone recommend a number now? Tom initially recommended 10, but
> > Andrew's tests suggest something > 100. Tom didn't do any tests so I
> > tend to favor Andrew's suggestion, if he has one.
>
> In the OP, he suggested "on the order of 100". Maybe we could just go with 100.
OK, I will go with 100 unless I hear otherwise.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-05-01 14:13:08 | Re: procost for to_tsvector |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-05-01 14:10:52 | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 |