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

Re: Slow PL/pgSQL 8.0.RC5 (7.4.6. 3times faster)

From: Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz>
To: Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Slow PL/pgSQL 8.0.RC5 (7.4.6. 3times faster)
Date: 2005-01-13 23:14:43
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0501140002560.29931-100000@kix.fsv.cvut.cz (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
I don't thing so differention on speed depends on compilation or other 
options. I compile 8.0 and 7.4.6 from source today. I didn't use any 
option for configure. But the difference is too big for optimalizations. 

[root(at)stehule root]# uname -a
Linux stehule.fsv.cvut.cz 2.6.4 #1 SMP Mon Mar 15 17:21:52 CET 2004 i586 
i586 i386 GNU/Linux

[root(at)stehule root]# gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 3.3 20030715 (Red Hat Linux 3.3-14)

I know PostgreSQL is little slowly when started new block BEGIN END now 
when I use catch exceptions. But in this test isn't any other subblock. Only 
one cycle and some basic arithmetic operations.


On Thu, 13 Jan 2005, Michael Fuhr wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 05:05:00PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz> writes:
> > >> And?
> > >> 
> > >> (ie, what test case are you talking about?)
> > 
> > > This test is function for searching max factor. It is speaking only about 
> > > quality of interpret an language. I would ask why?
> > 
> > So I can replicate your test.
> 
> SELECT delitel(1000000, 1);
> 
> Mean times over the last five of six runs on my poor 500MHz FreeBSD
> 4.11-PRERELEASE box:
> 
> 6741 ms   7.4.6 (from FreeBSD ports collection)
> 14427 ms  8.0.0rc5 (from CVS source)
> 
> I remembered that I had build 8.0.0rc5 with --enable-debug so I
> rebuilt it without that option, not sure if that would make a
> difference.  The mean time increased by 8% to 15580 ms, which was
> opposite from what I expected.  I re-ran the 7.4.6 tests and they
> came out the same as they had before.
> 
> I'm not sure what optimization flags (if any) the ports build of
> 7.4.6 might have used.  I can take a closer look if you think it
> matters.
> 
> 


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-01-13 23:25:10
Subject: Re: Slow PL/pgSQL 8.0.RC5 (7.4.6. 3times faster)
Previous:From: Mark WongDate: 2005-01-13 23:09:19
Subject: Re: sparse (static analyzer) report

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