Message-Id: <4A241F3C.EE98.0025.1@wicourts.gov>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:34:36 -0500
From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
To: "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com>,"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: It's June 1; do you know where your release is?
References: <19107.1243873940@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<4A241973.9000307@agliodbs.com><4A241973.9000307@agliodbs.com>
	<20871.1243880264@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <20871.1243880264@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: 
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> cost_nestloop and cost_hashjoin are broken for SEMI and ANTI joins
 
> Actually I'm hoping that Kevin Grittner will have something to
> report on that one soon
  
So far, I haven't found any performance regressions in the beta2
release compared to the snapshot from March 2nd on our challenging
queries.  They both perform as well or better than 8.3 for our
queries, although there is a slight increase in planning time to get
to the better plans.
 
Since there are new plans for most of these, I have had to actually
run them to confirm that there is no regression, and that takes some
time.  I'm still chipping away, but I would say that it looks good to
me; unless someone else has a query that's behaving badly, I wouldn't
hold it up for this.
 
I'll post right away if a subsequent test shows a problem.
 
-Kevin