| From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, hanada(at)metrosystems(dot)co(dot)jp, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw |
| Date: | 2011-02-12 22:33:37 |
| Message-ID: | 20110212223337.GA16941@tornado.leadboat.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 03:42:17PM -0600, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> In two hours of testing with a 90GB production database, the copy
> patch on top of HEAD ran 0.6% faster than HEAD for pg_dumpall
> (generating identical output files), but feeding that in to and
> empty cluster with psql ran 8.4% faster with the patch than without!
> I'm going to repeat that latter with more attention to whether
> everything made it in OK. (That's not as trivial to check as the
> dump phase.)
>
> Do you see any reason that COPY FROM should be significantly
> *faster* with the patch?
No. Up to, say, 0.5% wouldn't be too surprising, but 8.4% is surprising. What
is the uncertainty of that figure?
> Are there any particular things I should
> be checking for problems?
Nothing comes to mind.
Thanks,
nm
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2011-02-12 23:04:26 | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-12 22:29:43 | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |