| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Gasper Zejn <zejn(at)owca(dot)info>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pglz performance |
| Date: | 2019-11-26 19:17:13 |
| Message-ID: | c52bb971-ae60-81eb-be66-57f12d3ae102@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-11-26 10:43, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> In general, I think the results for both patches seem clearly a win, but
> maybe patch 1 is bit better, especially on the newer (xeon) CPU. So I'd
> probably go with that one.
Patch 1 is also the simpler patch, so it seems clearly preferable.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2019-11-26 19:21:27 | Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-11-26 18:25:18 | Re: CVE-2017-7484-induced bugs, or, btree cmp functions are not leakproof? |