Re: Review: Revise parallel pg_restore's scheduling heuristic

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Review: Revise parallel pg_restore's scheduling heuristic
Date: 2009-08-04 14:45:52
Message-ID: 22965.1249397152@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk> writes:
> t = 0.54 ((avg1 - avg2) / (stddev * sqrt(2/samples)))

> We then have to choose how certain we want to be that they're actually
> different, 90% is a reasonably easy level to hit (i.e. one part in ten,
> with 95% being more commonly quoted). For 20 samples we have 19 degrees
> of freedom--giving us a cut-off[1] of 1.328. 0.54 is obviously well
> below this allowing us to say that there's no "statistical significance"
> between the two samples at a 90% level.

Hmm, so what about 95% or 99% confidence?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-08-04 14:46:36 Re: pg_proc.probin should become text?
Previous Message Greg Stark 2009-08-04 14:42:34 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Cause pg_proc.probin to be declared as text, not bytea.