Tom Lane wrote: > Mark Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 03:15:54PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Thanks. This seems odd though, since it appears to level out at > >> something above 4K TPM. Your previous run > >> http://www.osdl.org/projects/dbt2dev/results/dev4-010/311/ > >> shows it dropping to 3500 or so. What changed? > > > Other than pulling from CVS at a different time, it should all be > > the same parameters, etc. > > Hmph. The truth is probably somewhere in between these two curves. > But in any case, I think we can make the conclusion we wanted to > make: 2Q isn't seriously worse than ARC. Since this is a dead line > of development anyway in view of the early results with the clock > sweep algorithm, I don't think there's any need to spend more time > measuring the differences carefully.
He reported a huge benefit in current CVS, like 30% --- was that because of the clock algorithm? > I'll go ahead and apply the 2Q patch to the 8.0 branch, unless there > are objections? Good. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
