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

Re: [Dbdpg-general] benchmarking old Pg and DBD::Pg

From: "Brandon Metcalf" <bmetcalf(at)nortel(dot)com>
To: Vlad <marchenko(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, dbdpg-general(at)gborg(dot)postgresql(dot)org,pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org, Sean Davis <sdavis2(at)mail(dot)nih(dot)gov>
Subject: Re: [Dbdpg-general] benchmarking old Pg and DBD::Pg
Date: 2005-04-08 20:53:44
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.58L.0504081549460.18466@cash.rhiamet.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
m == marchenko(at)gmail(dot)com writes:

 m> could you let us know YOUR  results with DBD::Pg 1.41 with and w/o
 m> patch that I've posted earlier? I just did some surface-deep testing
 m> here and here is what I've found:

 m> DBD-1.40 - slow
 m> DBD-1.41 - fast
 m> DBD-1.41, patched - fast. I  can't see difference between patched and
 m> non patched.


Hm.  What I'm seeing is that both DBD-Pg-1.40 and DBD-Pg-1.41 are
_much_ slower than the old Pg module.  I see no difference between
1.40 and 1.41.

In order to test your patches for performance, I'll need to put
together a test environment that simulates the load in our production
environment.  I'll let you know.

-- 
Brandon

In response to

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: VladDate: 2005-04-08 20:56:13
Subject: Re: [Dbdpg-general] benchmarking old Pg and DBD::Pg
Previous:From: VladDate: 2005-04-08 20:47:04
Subject: Re: [Dbdpg-general] benchmarking old Pg and DBD::Pg

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