Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I tried to repeat the DBT-2 runs with the "oldestxmin refresh" patch,
but to my surprise the baseline run with CVS head, without the patch,
behaved very differently than it did back in March.
I rerun the
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I tried to repeat the DBT-2 runs with the "oldestxmin refresh" patch,
but to my surprise the baseline run with CVS head, without the patch,
behaved very differently than it did back in March.
I rerun the a shorter 1h test with CVS
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I tried to repeat the DBT-2 runs with the "oldestxmin refresh" patch,
but to my surprise the baseline run with CVS head, without the patch,
behaved very differently than it did back in March.
I rerun the a shorter 1h test with CVS
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I tried to repeat the DBT-2 runs with the "oldestxmin refresh" patch,
> but to my surprise the baseline run with CVS head, without the patch,
> behaved very differently than it did back in March.
> I rerun the a shorter 1h test with CVS head from
I tried to repeat the DBT-2 runs with the "oldestxmin refresh" patch,
but to my surprise the baseline run with CVS head, without the patch,
behaved very differently than it did back in March.
I rerun the a shorter 1h test with CVS head from May 20th, and March 6th
(which is when I ran the earl
