RE: [HACKERS] Bug?

We're talking about quite selects/updates/inserts etc. If we say we have
50TPS that makes one transaction every 20 milliseconds. So one more for
parsing makes up for 5% more computation power. I doubt inlining offers
much more speedup.

Michael
--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager | topystem Systemhaus GmbH
meskes(at)topsystem(dot)de | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
meskes(at)debian(dot)org | 52146 Wuerselen
Go SF49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44

> ----------
> From: Tom I Helbekkmo[SMTP:tih(at)Hamartun(dot)Priv(dot)NO]
> Sent: Freitag, 6. Februar 1998 17:55
> To: Michael Meskes
> Cc: Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL Hacker
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bug?
>
> Bruce Momjian said:
>
> > The only fix for this would be to read all integers in as 64-bit
> > integers, then do the conversion, but that could be a performance
> > problem.
>
> Michael Meskes answered:
>
> > I agree. And performance is important. I think explicit type
> > conversion is what we should do. Or is it asked for too much if the
> > user has to add a ::float8 to the number?
>
> Am I being dense here? Can there really be a significant performance
> hit in the parsing of a query? Let's say that it takes a millisecond
> extra to do the right thing with a number. Does it matter? How many
> queries per second can we expect to process anyway?
>
> -tih
> --
> Popularity is the hallmark of mediocrity. --Niles Crane, "Frasier"
>