From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Miles Elam <mileselam+postgresql@gmail.com>
cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgcrypto docs
In-reply-to: 
 <CAPVvHdPj5rmf294FbWi2TuEy=hSxZMNjTURESaM5zY8P_wCJMg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAPVvHdPj5rmf294FbWi2TuEy=hSxZMNjTURESaM5zY8P_wCJMg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Miles Elam <mileselam+postgresql@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 07 May 2013 14:08:23 -0700"
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 18:05:43 -0400
Message-ID: <4820.1367964343@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org

Miles Elam <mileselam+postgresql@gmail.com> writes:
> Currently the docs show various stats on hashes per second and time needed
> to find a particular key.  Unfortunately since the times are based upon a
> Pentium 4 @1.5GHz, I worry that many would take the advice on that page at
> face value, e.g., "more than 100/sec is too much while less than 4/sec is
> too few," with a P4 in mind.

It seems like this table is guaranteed to be obsolete in a few years
no matter what.  Can we get rid of it entirely?

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs