Re: Improved scanner performance

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Improved scanner performance
Date: 2002-04-20 17:25:00
Message-ID: 28261.1019323500@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Here's a breakdown of the postmaster file sizes and the wall-clock run
> time of the long-literal test:

> no options 1749912 1m58.688s
> -CFe 1754315 1m49.223s
> -CF 1817621 1m43.780s
> -CFa 1890197 1m45.600s

> Seeing this, I think -CF should be OK space and time-wise.

Looks like a reasonable compromise to me too.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message "." 2002-04-20 23:33:06 Re: [INTERFACES] sqlbang
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2002-04-20 17:20:31 Re: Improved scanner performance