Em Seg, 2013-05-20 às 14:35 +0200, Andres Freund escreveu: > On 2013-05-20 09:31:15 -0300, Dickson S. Guedes wrote: > > Hum, I was supposing that I was doing something wrong but I'm getting > > the same result as before even using your test case and my results is > > still different from yours: > > > > > > + 71,27% postgres postgres [.] AtEOXact_Buffers > > + 7,67% postgres postgres [.] AtEOXact_CatCache > > + 6,30% postgres postgres [.] AllocSetCheck > > + 5,34% postgres libc-2.12.so [.] __mcount_internal > > + 2,14% postgres [kernel.kallsyms][k] activate_page > > That looks like you have configured with --enable-cassert and probably > also --enable-profiling? The former will give completely distorted > performance results...
Ah! Wrong PATH, so wrong binaries. Thanks Andres. -- Dickson S. Guedes mail/xmpp: gue...@guedesoft.net - skype: guediz http://guedesoft.net - http://www.postgresql.org.br http://www.rnp.br/keyserver/pks/lookup?search=0x8F3E3C06D428D10A
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part