From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 8.3devel slower than 8.2 under read-only load |
Date: | 2007-11-26 14:55:20 |
Message-ID: | 13678.1196088920@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> But I think there must be an action that we can take for 8.3 and that
> much runtime should not be given away easily. ISTM that we can win back
> the losses Guillaume has identified, plus gain a little more even.
Perhaps some sanity could be restored to this discussion by pointing out
that the 2007-01-01 code *also* clocks in at 37% spent in
oper_select_candidate. IOW it's been like this for a very long time.
I'm not interested in destabilizing 8.3 with panicky last-minute patches.
> So how about we have a cache-of-one:
Cache-of-one has exactly the same difficulty as cache-of-many, other
than the table lookup itself, which is a solved problem (hashtable).
You still have to determine how you identify the cached value and what
events require a cache flush. Nor do I see any particular reason to
assume that a cache of only one operator would be of any use for
real-world apps, as opposed to toy examples.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-11-26 15:02:43 | initdb for RC1 (was Re: [GENERAL] possible to create multivalued index from xpath() results in 8.3?) |
Previous Message | Mark Cave-Ayland | 2007-11-26 14:53:09 | Locating sharedir in PostgreSQL on Windows |