A writeup for the benchmark results is here -
https://smalldatum.blogspot.com/2024/07/postgres-17beta2-vs-sysbench-looking.html
pg17beta2 and pg17beta1 look good so far
On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 10:49 AM MARK CALLAGHAN wrote:
> My results have too much variance so this is a false alarm. One day I
>
My results have too much variance so this is a false alarm. One day I might
learn whether the noise is from HW, Postgres or my test method.
I ended up trying 10 builds between 17beta1 and 17beta2, but even with that
I don't have a clear signal.
On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 8:48 PM David Rowley wrote:
On Sat, 6 Jul 2024 at 15:11, MARK CALLAGHAN wrote:
> On small servers I have at home I can reproduce the problem without
> concurrent queries and 17beta2 is 5% to 10% slower there.
>
> The SQL statement for the scan microbenchmark is:
> SELECT * from %s WHERE LENGTH(c) < 0
Can you share the CREA
I am seeking advice. For now I hope for a suggestion about changes from
17beta1 to 17beta2 that might cause the problem -- assuming there is a
problem, and not a mistake in my testing.
One of the sysbench microbenchmarks that I run does a table scan with a
WHERE clause that filters out all rows. T
