Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16

Alexander Law <exclusion@gmail.com>

From: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Cc: MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2023-07-07T13:00:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hello David,

11.05.2023 16:00, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
> Yeah, I see. It's also interesting to me, which tests perform better after
> that commit. It takes several hours to run all tests, so I can't present
> results quickly, but I'll try to collect this information next week.

To my regret, I could not find such tests that week, so I decided to try
later, after reviewing my benchmark running infrastructure.

But for now, as Postgres Pro company graciously shared the benchmarking
infrastructure project [1], it's possible for anyone to confirm or deny my
results. (You can also see which tests were performed and how.)

Having done one more round of comprehensive testing, I still couldn't find
winning tests for commit 3c6fc5820 (but reassured that
test s64da_tpcds.query87 loses a little (and also s64da_tpcds.query38)).
So it seems to me that the tests I performed or their parameters is not
representative enough for that improvement, unfortunately.

[1] https://github.com/postgrespro/pg-mark

Best regards,
Alexander



Commits

  1. Add back SQLValueFunction for SQL keywords

  2. Add missing TAP test name

  3. Have the planner consider Incremental Sort for DISTINCT