Re: Faster StrNCpy

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Strong, David" <david(dot)strong(at)unisys(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Faster StrNCpy
Date: 2006-10-02 21:09:16
Message-ID: 14947.1159823356@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

"Strong, David" <david(dot)strong(at)unisys(dot)com> writes:
> Obviously, different copy mechanisms suit different data sizes. So, I
> added a little debug to the strlcpy () function that was added to
> Postgres the other day. I ran a test against Postgres for ~15 minutes
> that used 2 client backends and the BG writer - 8330804 calls to
> strlcpy () were generated by the test.

> Out of the 8330804 calls, 6226616 calls used a maximum copy size of
> 2213 bytes e.g. strlcpy (dest, src, 2213) and 2104074 calls used a
> maximum copy size of 64 bytes.

> I know the 2213 size calls come from the set_ps_display () function. I
> don't know where the 64 size calls come from, yet.

Prepared-statement and portal hashtable lookups, likely. Were your
clients using V3 extended query protocol?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Strong, David 2006-10-02 21:35:19 Re: Faster StrNCpy
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-10-02 21:06:50 Re: Faster StrNCpy

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Strong, David 2006-10-02 21:35:19 Re: Faster StrNCpy
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-10-02 21:06:50 Re: Faster StrNCpy