Re: [Dbdpg-general] benchmarking old Pg and DBD::Pg - Mailing list pgsql-interfaces

From Brandon Metcalf
Subject Re: [Dbdpg-general] benchmarking old Pg and DBD::Pg
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.58L.0504081549460.18466@cash.rhiamet.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [Dbdpg-general] benchmarking old Pg and DBD::Pg  (Vlad <marchenko@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-interfaces
m == marchenko@gmail.com writes:
m> could you let us know YOUR  results with DBD::Pg 1.41 with and w/om> patch that I've posted earlier? I just did some
surface-deeptestingm> here and here is what I've found:
 
m> DBD-1.40 - slowm> DBD-1.41 - fastm> DBD-1.41, patched - fast. I  can't see difference between patched andm> non
patched.


Hm.  What I'm seeing is that both DBD-Pg-1.40 and DBD-Pg-1.41 are
_much_ slower than the old Pg module.  I see no difference between
1.40 and 1.41.

In order to test your patches for performance, I'll need to put
together a test environment that simulates the load in our production
environment.  I'll let you know.

-- 
Brandon


pgsql-interfaces by date:

Previous
From: mps@theintraweb.net
Date:
Subject: pg.py under Mac OS X
Next
From: "Brandon Metcalf"
Date:
Subject: Re: [Dbdpg-general] benchmarking old Pg and DBD::Pg