Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 040472E36CC for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 04:44:57 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 84144-06 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 04:44:39 -0400 (AST) Received: from outmail137082.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail137082.authsmtp.co.uk [62.13.137.82]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62FD92E34EC for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 04:44:51 -0400 (AST) Received: from outmail128181.authsmtp.net (outmail128181.authsmtp.net [62.13.128.181]) by punt4.authsmtp.com (8.14.1/8.14.1/Kp) with ESMTP id m158i21g083997; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:44:02 GMT Received: from [192.168.0.3] (85-211-31-42.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk [85.211.31.42]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Kp) with ESMTP id m158im4b027223; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:44:49 GMT Subject: Re: Benchmark Data requested From: Simon Riggs To: "Jignesh K. Shah" Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <47A792BE.80804@sun.com> References: <1202150236.4252.521.camel@ebony.site> <47A792BE.80804@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 08:45:36 +0000 Message-Id: <1202201136.4252.623.camel@ebony.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Quench: 9c5d9229-d3c6-11dc-9554-001185d377ca X-AuthRoute: OCdxZQATClZOTQEd DAteCiNZVAwpPBRK HVkIKg5MJUcNSQVJ NksadBtFaABba1xT HGQLW1xEUFV7XWd/ bwMfZQBDYEtPQQZr TkxLXVBXCwUmXB0E DkdDVktydQJEen0+ ZERmXT5SD0EufER/ S1MAFj4AeGZhPDMC WUVdcx5UcAJLdhoR aVd4ByJDAzANdhEA MjUdGAoUCH11JSJe QgQEN1FabU8XF3Ym SgkfEC4zEEFt X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633235383639.squirrel.dmpriest.net.uk:787/Kp X-Report-SPAM: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-Virus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system! X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200802/23 X-Sequence-Number: 28565 On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 17:33 -0500, Jignesh K. Shah wrote: > First of all I think it is a violation of TPC rules to publish numbers > without auditing them first. So even if I do the test to show the > better performance of PostgreSQL 8.3, I cannot post it here or any > public forum without doing going through the "process". I'm not interested in the final results, pricing etc.. Just a query by query elapsed times. Can you show which part of the rules precludes this? I can't find it. This is a developer list, so "publishing" things here is what we do for discussion, so it's hardly breaking the spirit of the TPC rules to publish results here, in the hope of focusing development effort. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com