From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Add parallel-aware hash joins. |
Date: | 2018-01-24 19:57:04 |
Message-ID: | 15913.1516823824@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> I find that to be a completely bogus straw-man argument. The point of
> looking at the prairiedog time series is just to see a data series in
> which the noise level is small enough to discern the signal. If anyone's
> got years worth of data off a more modern machine, and they can extract
> a signal from that, by all means let's consider that data instead.
Just to make the point, I scraped the numbers for skink's "installcheck"
and "check" steps, which are data series I imagine at least Andres will
concede are worth paying attention to. I made no attempt to clean
outliers, so these curves are pretty noisy, but I think there is a very
clear upward bump since mid-December.
regards, tom lane
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
image/png | 4.8 KB | |
image/png | 4.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-01-24 20:08:09 | Re: pgsql: Add parallel-aware hash joins. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-01-24 19:31:47 | Re: pgsql: Add parallel-aware hash joins. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-01-24 20:05:01 | Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-01-24 19:55:49 | Re: copy.c allocation constant |