I think Han and Kontur have some benchmarks. https://git.osgeo.org/gitea/postgis/postgis-performance
In my pgTap benchmarks the index build timing is approximately 3-4 times faster with osm data of Belarus and China. Han said the query performance slowed a little, but I didn't see that in my pgTap tests (no really noticeable difference with intersect checking), so might have been fixed by Kontur in their cleanup before I ran these tests or I'm missing a test. Here are the pgTap benchmarks based on alpha1 with PG 14.0rc1, nothing with the index has changed since so should be representative. https://git.osgeo.org/gitea/postgis/postgis-performance/src/branch/master/pg tap/postgis/03_build_gist_index.sql -- index building compare -- PostGIS 3.1.4 [08:45:51] pgtap/postgis/03_build_gist_index.sql .... 1..3 ok 1 - Index built: multipolygons ok 2 - Index built: lines ok 3 - Index built: points ok 70742 ms ( 0.01 usr 0.00 sys + 0.00 cusr 0.01 csys = 0.02 CPU) PostGIS 3.2.0alpha1 [09:17:54] pgtap/postgis/03_build_gist_index.sql .... 1..3 ok 1 - Index built: multipolygons ok 2 - Index built: lines ok 3 - Index built: points ok 17029 ms ( 0.00 usr 0.00 sys + 0.00 cusr 0.01 csys = 0.01 CPU) -- intersect checks compare https://git.osgeo.org/gitea/postgis/postgis-performance/src/branch/master/pg tap/postgis/04_index_intersect.sql -- POSTGIS "3.1.4" [08:46:16] pgtap/postgis/04_index_intersect.sql ..... 1..9 ok 1 - Check has osm_belarus.multipolygons has gist ok 2 - Check has osm_belarus.lines geom gist ok 3 - Check has osm_belarus.points geom gist ok 4 - intersect multipolygon check no match with index ok 5 - intersect multipolygon check match with index ok 6 - intersect linestring check no match with index ok 7 - intersect linestring check match with index ok 8 - intersect pointcheck no match with index ok 9 - intersect point check match with index ok 24981 ms ( 0.00 usr 0.00 sys + 0.02 cusr 0.00 csys = 0.02 CPU) -- POSTGIS="3.2.0alpha1 3.2.0alpha1" [09:18:16] pgtap/postgis/04_index_intersect.sql ..... 1..9 ok 1 - Check has osm_belarus.multipolygons has gist ok 2 - Check has osm_belarus.lines geom gist ok 3 - Check has osm_belarus.points geom gist ok 4 - intersect multipolygon check no match with index ok 5 - intersect multipolygon check match with index ok 6 - intersect linestring check no match with index ok 7 - intersect linestring check match with index ok 8 - intersect pointcheck no match with index ok 9 - intersect point check match with index ok 22459 ms ( 0.00 usr 0.00 sys + 0.00 cusr 0.01 csys = 0.01 CPU) > -----Original Message----- > From: postgis-users [mailto:postgis-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf > Of Marco Boeringa > Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2021 4:27 PM > To: PostGIS Users Discussion <postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org> > Subject: [postgis-users] Experiences with the new faster GiST building in > PostGIS 3.2 and PostgreSQL 14? > > Hi all, > > Now with the betas out for PostGIS 3.2, I was wondering if anyone has some > real world comparative figures to share for creating spatial indexes using GiST > in PostGIS 3.2 and PostgreSQL 14, versus the older GiST implementation in > previous versions? > > Creating spatial indexes on e.g. OpenStreetMap sized datasets is still an > expensive operation, and any gains in the latest releases would be highly > welcome. Has someone done a comparison between releases that might give > all of us that haven't yet upgraded, an idea of possible benefits of the new > implementation? > > Marco > > _______________________________________________ > postgis-users mailing list > postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users _______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
