On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:29 AM, Kevin Grittner <
kgrittn@gmail.com> wrote:
>> * The results are a bit noisy, but I think in general this shows
>> that for certain cases there's a clearly measurable difference
>> (up to 5%) between the "disabled" and "reverted" cases. This is
>> particularly visible on the smallest data set.
>
> In some cases, the differences are in favor of disabled over
> reverted.
There were 75 samples each of "disabled" and "reverted" in the
spreadsheet. Averaging them all, I see this:
reverted: 290,660 TPS
disabled: 292,014 TPS
That's a 0.46% overall increase in performance with the patch,
disabled, compared to reverting it. I'm surprised that you
consider that to be a "clearly measurable difference". I mean, it
was measured and it is a difference, but it seems to be well within
the noise. Even though it is based on 150 samples, I'm not sure we
should consider it statistically significant.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB:
http://www.enterprisedb.comThe Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
