On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 5:33 PM Melih Mutlu <m.melihmutlu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Also here are some numbers with 10 tables loaded with some data :
>
> | 10 MB | 100 MB
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> master | 2868.524 ms | 14281.711 ms
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> patch | 1750.226 ms | 14592.800 ms
>
> The difference between the master and the patch is getting close when the size of tables increase, as expected.
>
Right, but when the size is 100MB, it seems to be taking a bit more
time. Do we want to evaluate with different sizes to see how it looks?
Other than that all the numbers are good.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
