On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 08:06:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jochem van Dieten <jochemd@gmail.com> writes:
> > On 2/11/06, Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote:
> >> http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/wiki?p=SpeedComparison
>
> > The values appear to originate from an intrsinsically flawed test setup.
>
> > Just take the first test. The database has to do 1000 commits. That
> > means 1000 I/O operations. There is no way that a 7200 RPM disk can do
> > that in the time that that test says it took. It is reasonable to say
> > that a disk can do 1 I/O operation per rotation, which means that any
> > test result below 9 seconds is untrustworthy.
>
> Disk lying about write-complete, no doubt. Of course that probably
> affects all the databases about the same.
>
> The fact that it's on Windows is probably handicapping us noticeably,
> considering that that port still isn't well optimized.
>
> Test 8's problem is most likely lack of an ANALYZE --- although when
> I tried to duplicate it, I got a bitmap index scan, which shouldn't be
> horrendously slow. There's something fishy about that one.
FWIW, here's a thread about this test:
http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-users%40sqlite.org/msg12945.html
Part of the problem seems to be related to psql; he was able to run test
8 in about 5 seconds using pgAdmin:
http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-users%40sqlite.org/msg12955.html
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
