| From: | "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour) |
| Date: | 2006-02-16 04:47:50 |
| Message-ID: | dt10bq$1bp$1@news.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote
> "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> writes:
> > By "did this 100 times" do you mean generate a sequence of at most
> > 200000*100 numbers, and for every 200000 numbers, the first half are all
> > zeros and the other half are uniform random numbers?
>
> No, I mean I ran the bit of SQL script I gave 100 separate times.
>
I must misunderstand something here -- I can't figure out that why the cost
of the same procedure keep climbing?
Regards,
Qingqing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2006-02-16 04:50:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Patch Submission Guidelines |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-02-16 04:40:20 | Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Qingqing Zhou | 2006-02-16 04:51:32 | Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-02-16 04:40:20 | Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour) |