From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Quality and Performance |
Date: | 2007-11-27 18:54:41 |
Message-ID: | 8610.1196189681@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Well I think that we do take performance into account. I agree
>> that we should *never* have a regression in performance from release
>> to release, which is what I believe has inspired this thread.
> Hmm. I have developed several features that have driven performance
> down.
Even changes that are not feature additions but intended solely to
improve performance may have corner cases where they are losses rather
than wins. I think "*never* have a regression in performance" is not
only pie-in-the-sky but would be a bad policy to adopt, because it
would mean for instance that we couldn't intentionally optimize common
cases at the expense of uncommon ones.
However, I think everybody agrees that getting blindsided by unexpected
performance dropoffs is a bad thing. We really need to reinstitute
the sort of daily (or near-daily) performance tracking that Mark Wong
used to be doing, and extend it to cover a wider variety of test cases
than just DBT-2. As an example, I'll bet that this issue of operator
lookup speed would never have been visible at all in DBT-2.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-11-27 19:02:24 | PG 7.3 is five years old today |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-11-27 18:33:46 | Re: Quality and Performance |