| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Test to dump and restore objects left behind by regression |
| Date: | 2025-08-05 14:33:38 |
| Message-ID: | 202508051433.ebznuqrxt4b2@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello,
On 2025-Apr-04, Andres Freund wrote:
> FWIW, with cassert and -O2, it's:
>
> 17:
> real 0m53.981s
> user 3m22.837s
> sys 3m24.237s
>
> HEAD:
> real 1m19.749s
> user 4m54.526s
> sys 4m15.657s
>
> so this isn't just due to me using -O0. A 48% increase is better than a 60%
> increase, but it's still not sustainable.
I happened to notice that this item was still open in the commitfest,
and rereading the thread I now have second thoughts about having it
enabled by default, giving your complaints about speed. How about
applying this to 18 and master?
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"This is a foot just waiting to be shot" (Andrew Dunstan)
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Skip-expensive-pg_upgrade-test-unless-PG_TEST_EXTRA.patch | text/x-diff | 911 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dmitry | 2025-08-05 14:36:26 | Re: IPC/MultixactCreation on the Standby server |
| Previous Message | Álvaro Herrera | 2025-08-05 13:47:07 | Re: Implement waiting for wal lsn replay: reloaded |