Mike Castle wrote:
> In article <4896.1051644271@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >dalgoda@ix.netcom.com (Mike Castle) writes:
> >> Better yet: Anyway of running performance tests from configure?
> >
> >Peter will object to that because of cross-compilation issues; and I'll
> >object because I run configure often enough that I don't want it to take
> >the time that would be needed for a reliable performance test ...
>
>
> Understandable.
>
> What about --with-pg-qsort (that defaults to use for currently known
> systems) with a test program people could run if they want?
Let's have folks run a test program and get the results for some OS's.
I would prefer to get some results before moving to a formalized option.
> In that case, would counting the calls to the compare function be the
> appropriate measurement (I'd think either wall or system time would vary
> too widely).
No. It is not calls the compare function, but total time in the qsort
routine that has to be measured.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
