From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Faster NUMERIC implementation |
Date: | 2003-03-20 03:51:32 |
Message-ID: | 19859.1048132292@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I've been amusing myself the last several evenings by working on a
reimplementation of the NUMERIC datatype, along the lines of previous
discussion (use base-10000 digits instead of base-10 so that the number
of iterations of the inner loops decreases by a factor of about 4).
It's not ready to commit yet, but I've got it passing the regression
tests, and I find that it runs the 'numeric' test about a factor of five
faster than CVS tip; so it seems worth doing. A couple questions for
the group:
1. Has anyone got a problem with changing the on-disk representation of
NUMERIC for 7.4? The only objection I can think of is that it'd prevent
"pg_upgrade" from working ... but we don't have pg_upgrade capability
right now anyway, and I've not heard that anyone is planning to make it
happen for 7.4.
2. The numeric regression test probably isn't a good benchmark for this,
since it spends most of its time pushing around numerics with hundreds of
digits. I doubt that's representative of common usage. Can anyone
offer a more real-world benchmark test?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-20 03:51:56 | Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-20 03:42:20 | Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff |