| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Sun performance - Major discovery! |
| Date: | 2003-10-08 17:43:31 |
| Message-ID: | 1065635011.3424.25.camel@tokyo |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 11:46, Jeff wrote:
> Yeah - like I expected it was able to generate much better code for
> _bt_checkkeys which was the #1 function in gcc on both sun & linux.
>
> and as you can see, suncc was just able to generate much nicer code.
What CFLAGS does configure pick for gcc? From
src/backend/template/solaris, I'd guess it's not enabling any
optimization. Is that the case? If so, some gcc numbers with -O and -O2
would be useful.
-Neil
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-10-08 17:44:17 | Re: [HACKERS] pg_restore -d doesn't display output |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2003-10-08 17:38:53 | confused about bit strings |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-10-08 17:49:55 | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-08 17:28:53 | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |