On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 2:49 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > 16k 64k 256k 1024k > Head 1232.779 804.24 1134.723 901.257 > Patch 1371.493 1277.705 862.598 783.481 > > So what I have noticed is that in most of the cases on head as well as > with the patch, increasing the queue size make it faster, but with > head suddenly for this particular combination of rows, column and > thread the execution time is very low for 64k queue size and then > again the execution time increased with 256k queue size and then > follow the pattern. So this particular dip in the execution time on > the head looks a bit suspicious to me. I mean how could we justify > this sudden big dip in execution time w.r.t the other pattern.
Oh, interesting. So there's not really a performance regression here so much as that one particular case ran exceptionally fast on the unpatched code. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
