On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:54 PM, Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org> wrote:
> With partial-sort-basic-1 and this fix on the same test suite, the
> planner overhead is now a more manageable 0.5% to 1.3%; one test is
> faster by 0.5%.
Ping, Robert or anyone, does this overhead seem bearable or is that
still too much?
Do these numbers look conclusive enough or should I run more tests?
> I think the 1st patch now has a bug in initial_cost_mergejoin; you
> still pass the "presorted_keys" argument to cost_sort, making it
> calculate a partial sort cost
Ping, Alexander?
Regards,
Marti
