| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Robinson <robinson(at)netrinsics(dot)com> |
| Cc: | lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] regression bigtest needs very long time |
| Date: | 1999-07-01 13:32:30 |
| Message-ID: | 11229.930835950@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Robinson <robinson(at)netrinsics(dot)com> writes:
> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
>> We assume that most data stays inside the database on every query.
>> That is, one should optimize for comparison/calculation speed, not
>> formatting speed. If you are comparing a bunch of rows to return one,
>> you will be much happier if the comparison happens quickly, as opposed
>> to doing that slowly but formatting the single output value quickly.
> The optimizations under discussion will not significantly affect comparison
> speed one way or the other, so comparison speed is a moot issue.
On what do you base that assertion? I'd expect comparisons to be sped
up significantly: no need to unpack the storage format, and the inner
loop handles four digits per iteration instead of one.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-07-01 13:45:13 | Re: [HACKERS] Bug tracking |
| Previous Message | Patrick Welche | 1999-07-01 10:34:20 | Web archive searcher |