"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 10:09 -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>
>> just a small 'me too' here, the RI penalty seems higher than it should
>> be...especially when the foreign key table is very small, and I can
>> see how this would impact benchmarks.
>
> An
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 10:09 -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 7/25/07, Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Should you get the chance I would appreciate a comparative test for
> > TPC-E.
> >
> > 1. Normal TPC-E versus
> > 2. TPC-E with all FKs against Fixed tables replaced with CHECK( co
On 7/25/07, Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 10:03 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>
> > Has anyone benchmarked HEAD against 8.2? I'd like some numbers to use in
> > my OSCon lightning talk. Numbers for both with and without HOT would be
> > even better (I know we've
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 15:07 +0200, Mario Weilguni wrote:
> Am Mittwoch 25 Juli 2007 schrieb Simon Riggs:
> > I have reasonable evidence that Referential Integrity is the major
> > performance bottleneck and would like some objective evidence that this
> > is the case.
>
> Just curious, will 8.3 st
Am Mittwoch 25 Juli 2007 schrieb Simon Riggs:
> I have reasonable evidence that Referential Integrity is the major
> performance bottleneck and would like some objective evidence that this
> is the case.
Just curious, will 8.3 still check FK constraints (and use locks) even if the
referencing col
On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 10:03 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>
> > Has anyone benchmarked HEAD against 8.2? I'd like some numbers to use in
> > my OSCon lightning talk. Numbers for both with and without HOT would be
> > even better (I know we've got HOT-specific benchmarks, but I want
> > compl
