Hi.
thank you for your answer.
However, if it is a locale difference,
I do not think there will be any significant performance difference between EDB 10.6 and EDB 11.1.
(EDB 10.6 was also the locale C)
----
tps (shown again)
connections 10.6(EDB) 11.1(EDB) 11.1(BigSQL)
1 550.0 409.6 605.8
2 1103.6 753.5 1229.8
4 2200.4 1236.8 2539.8
8 4460.9 2241.5 5011.0
16 8862.1 2798.4 9827.0
32 16906.3 1896.0 18865.8
48 16688.8 1599.3 18794.8
64 16614.9 1438.6 19055.3
96 9492.4 1309.5 10396.9
David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 18:08, Toshi Harada <harada.toshi@po.ntt-tx.co.jp> wrote:
> > explain_bigsql_11.1.txt explain analyze log.
> > explain_edb_10.6.txt explain analyze log.
> > explain_edb_11.0.txt explain analyze log.
> > select_model.sql explain analyze statement.
> > settings_bigsql_11.1 BigSQL 11 configuration.
> > settings_diff.txt EDB 11 and BigSQL 11 diff
> > settings_edb_10.6 EDB 10 configuration.
> > settings_edb_11.1 EDB 11 configuration.
>
> Most likely down to the collation being C on the EDB versions and
> Japanese_Japan.932 on the bigsql one.
>
> --
> David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
