From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Alon Goldshuv" <agoldshuv(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Libpq COPY optimization patch |
Date: | 2006-01-24 15:36:35 |
Message-ID: | 18858.1138116995@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
"Alon Goldshuv" <agoldshuv(at)greenplum(dot)com> writes:
> I guess that although parseInput is cheap we could still use a conditional
> to see when data was sent and only then call it (without PQconsumeInput)
> instead of calling it every single time PQputCopyData is called. Any
> objection to that?
You mean something like
if (input-buffer-not-empty)
parseInput();
? This still bothers me a bit since it's a mixing of logic levels;
PQputCopyData is an output routine, it shouldn't be getting its fingers
dirty with input buffer contents. I'm willing to tolerate this if it
can be demonstrated that it provides a useful performance gain compared
to the unconditional parseInput call, but let's see some numbers.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alon Goldshuv | 2006-01-24 16:40:06 | Re: Libpq COPY optimization patch |
Previous Message | Alon Goldshuv | 2006-01-24 15:19:27 | Re: Libpq COPY optimization patch |