On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
a really good use-case for this optimization.
On 5/2/12 10:20 AM, Jameison Martin wrote:
Attached are the following as per various requests:
* test_results.txt: the performance benchmarking results,
* TestTrailingNull.java: the performance benchmarking code, with a few additional scenarios as per various requests
* hardinfo_report.txt: some information about the hardware and OS of the system on which the benchmarks were run, and
* postgresql.conf: the postgresql.conf used when running benchmarks. Note that the changes made to the vanilla postgresql.conf can be identified by looking for the string 'jamie' in the file I attached (there aren't that many)
Nice, thanks. I'll try some of my own tests when I get a chance; I haveAttached are the following as per various requests:
* test_results.txt: the performance benchmarking results,
* TestTrailingNull.java: the performance benchmarking code, with a few additional scenarios as per various requests
* hardinfo_report.txt: some information about the hardware and OS of the system on which the benchmarks were run, and
* postgresql.conf: the postgresql.conf used when running benchmarks. Note that the changes made to the vanilla postgresql.conf can be identified by looking for the string 'jamie' in the file I attached (there aren't that many)
a really good use-case for this optimization.
The CommitFest application lists you as the reviewer for this patch.
Are you (I hope) planning to review it?
I see you posted up a follow-up email asking Tom what he had in mind.
Personally, I don't think this needs incredibly complicated testing.
I think you should just test a workload involving inserting and/or
updating rows with lots of trailing NULL columns, and then another
workload with a table of similar width that... doesn't. If we can't
find a regression - or, better, we find a win in one or both cases -
then I think we're done here.
