On 9/21/07, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > pre hot:
> > run 1: 3617.641 ms
> > run 2: 5195.215 ms
> > run 3: 6760.449 ms
> > after vacuum:
> > run 1: 4171.362 ms
> > run 2: 5513.317 ms
> > run 3: 6884.125 ms
> > post hot:
> > run 1: Time: 7286.292 ms
> > run 2: Time: 7477.089 ms
> > run 3: Time: 7701.229 ms
> >
> > those results aren't exactly terrible, and this case is highly artificial.
>
> Your runtimes seem to be increasing as you repeat the test. Did you
> remove the "DROP TABLE" from the beginning? On my laptop, post hot takes
> ~2x as long as pre hot, even when repeated, which matches the results of
> your first runs.
correct.
Well, my first round of results are so far not showing the big gains I
saw with hot in some of the earlier patches...so far, it looks
approximately to be a wash although with the reduced need to vacuum.
i'll test some more when things settle down.
merlin