Received: from localhost (maia-4.hub.org [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414769FB6AA
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  5 Mar 2007 16:17:25 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 61083-01 for
	<pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  5 Mar 2007 16:17:15 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from cronos.madness.at (madness.at [217.196.146.217])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 548379FB70E
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  5 Mar 2007 16:17:14 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mastermind.kaltenbrunner.cc ([83.215.233.60])
	by cronos.madness.at with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>)
	id 1HOJfp-00013l-Df; Mon, 05 Mar 2007 21:20:49 +0100
Message-ID: <45EC7AC3.2030408@kaltenbrunner.cc>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 21:17:07 +0100
From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>
User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061220)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Arjen van der Meijden <acmmailing@tweakers.net>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [kris@obsecurity.org: Progress on scaling of FreeBSD
	on 8 CPU systems]
References: <20070227182621.GE29041@decibel.org>
	<20070302150129.GF4885@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<45E84790.6050609@tweakers.net> <45EBF658.30907@tweakers.net>
	<45EC02B4.2070409@kaltenbrunner.cc> <45EC0443.1070107@tweakers.net>
In-Reply-To: <45EC0443.1070107@tweakers.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.2.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.166 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, BAYES_50,
	FORGED_RCVD_HELO
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200703/94
X-Sequence-Number: 23499

Arjen van der Meijden wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> ouch - do I read that right that even after tom's fixes for the
>> "regressions" in 8.2.0 we are still 30% slower then the -HEAD checkout
>> from the middle of the 8.2 development cycle ?
> 
> Yes, and although I tested about 17 different cvs-checkouts, Tom and I
> weren't really able to figure out where "it" happened. So its a bit of a
> mystery why the performance is so much worse.

double ouch - losing that much in performance without an idea WHY it
happened is really unfortunate :-(


Stefan