Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric (was: Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization))
| От | Peter Geoghegan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric (was: Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAM3SWZS-9VreaKQhrriYotYJW5LoERF_k2Le=tbEqc7-WKtyCg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric (was: Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)) (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric (was: Re: B-Tree support
function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization))
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > For example with the same percentile_disc() test as in the other thread: > > create table stuff as select random()::numeric as randnum > from generate_series(1,1000000); > > analyze stuff; > > select percentile_disc(0) within group (order by randnum) from stuff; > > > I get pretty much no difference in runtimes (not even for the smallest > dataset, where the Datum patch speedup was significant). > > What am I doing wrong? So you're testing both the patches (numeric + datum tuplesort) at the same time? I can't think why this would make any difference. Did you forget to initdb, so that the numeric sortsupport routine was used? -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: