SRFs ... no performance penalty?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: SRFs ... no performance penalty?
Date: 2003-10-21 00:55:12
Message-ID: 200310201755.12713.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Folks,

I'm working on the demo session for our upcoming presentation at PHPCon.

As a side issue, we ended up comparing 3 versions of the same search screen:

1) All in PHP with views;
2) Using a function to build a query and count results but executing that
query directly and sorting, paging in PHP;
3) Using a Set Returning function to handle row-returning, sorting, and
paging.

All three methods were executing a series moderately complex query against a
medium-sized data set (only about 20,000 rows but it's on a laptop). The
postgresql.conf was tuned like a webserver; e.g. low sort_mem, high
max_connections.

So far, on the average of several searches, we have:

1) 0.19687 seconds
2) 0.20667 seconds
3) 0.20594 seconds

In our tests, using any kind of PL/pgSQL function seems to carry a 0.01 second
penalty over using PHP to build the search query. I'm not sure if this is
comparitive time for string-parsing or something else; the 0.01 seems to be
consistent regardless of scale.

The difference between using a PL/pgSQL function as a query-builder only (the
7.2.x method) and using SRFs was small enough not to be significant.

--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Sullivan 2003-10-21 10:56:56 Re: index file bloating still in 7.4 ?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-10-20 21:42:52 Re: index file bloating still in 7.4 ?