From: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Why overhead of SPI is so large? |
Date: | 2019-08-23 09:05:30 |
Message-ID: | 0fb4b4aa-7266-289e-be23-7ac5f8def42e@postgrespro.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 22.08.2019 18:56, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
> čt 22. 8. 2019 v 17:51 odesílatel Konstantin Knizhnik
> <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru <mailto:k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>> napsal:
>
> Some more information...
> First of all I found out that marking PL/pgSQL function as
> immutable significantly increase speed of its execution:
> 19808 ms vs. 27594. It happens because exec_eval_simple_expr is
> taken snapshot if function is volatile (default).
> I wonder if PL/pgSQL compiler can detect that evaluated expression
> itself is actually immutable and there is no need to take snapshot
> for each invocation of this function. Also I have tried yet
> another PL language - JavaScript, which is now new outsider,
> despite to the fact that
> v8 JIT compiler is very good.
>
>
> I have a plan to do some work in this direction. Snapshot is not
> necessary for almost buildin functions. If expr calls only buildin
> functions, then probably can be called without snapshot and without
> any work with plan cache.
>
I wonder if the following simple patch is correct?
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
plpgsql_exec_expr.patch | text/x-patch | 2.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-08-23 09:10:28 | Re: Why overhead of SPI is so large? |
Previous Message | Dent John | 2019-08-23 08:52:43 | Re: (select query)/relation as first class citizen |