issue 1: `pg_constraint.c:564`I need to check that `conppeqop` is not null and copy it but I don't know how to check its type since its a char*issue 2: `matview.c:768`I need to pass `fkreftype` but I don't have it in the rest of the functIonOn Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Mark Rofail <markm.rofail@gmail.com> wrote:I was wondering if anyone knows the proper way to write a benchmarking test for the @>> operator. I used the below script in my previous attempt https://gist.github.com/markrofail/174ed370a2f2ac24800fde2fc27e2d38The script does the following steps:1. Generate Table A with 5 rows2. Generate Table B with n rows such as:every row of Table B is an array of IDs referencing rows in Table A.The tests we ran previously had Table B up to 1 million rows and the results can be seen here :https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJvoCusMuLnYZUbwTBKt%2Bp6bB9GwiTqF95OsQFHXixJj3LkxVQ%40mail.gmail.comHow would we change this so it would be more exhaustive and accurate?Regards,Mark Rofail
I was wondering if anyone knows the proper way to write a benchmarking test for the @>> operator. I used the below script in my previous attempt https://gist.github.com/markrofail/174ed370a2f2ac24800fde2fc27e2d38The script does the following steps:1. Generate Table A with 5 rows2. Generate Table B with n rows such as:every row of Table B is an array of IDs referencing rows in Table A.The tests we ran previously had Table B up to 1 million rows and the results can be seen here :https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJvoCusMuLnYZUbwTBKt%2Bp6bB9GwiTqF95OsQFHXixJj3LkxVQ%40mail.gmail.comHow would we change this so it would be more exhaustive and accurate?Regards,Mark Rofail
pgsql-hackers by date:
Соглашаюсь с условиями обработки персональных данных
