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

Re: I: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch

From: Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: I: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch
Date: 2010-09-29 15:55:14
Message-ID: 820021.39561.qm@web29018.mail.ird.yahoo.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > Here's my post with a (very simple) performance test:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-02/msg00766.php
> I  think the 10M rows test is more in line with what we want (83s vs.  646).


Can someone else test the patch to see if what I found is still valid?
I don't think it makes much sense if I'm the only one that says
"this is faster" :)


      

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-09-29 17:01:29
Subject: Re: Stalled post to pgsql-committers
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-09-29 15:36:48
Subject: Re: security hook on table creation

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