From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Manipulating complex types as non-contiguous structures in-memory |
Date: | 2015-05-11 01:36:02 |
Message-ID: | 20150511013602.GK12950@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-05-10 21:09:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > I'm not sure what exactly to use as a performance benchmark
> > here. For now I chose
> > SELECT * FROM (SELECT ARRAY(SELECT generate_series(1, 10000))) d, generate_series(1, 1000) repeat(i);
> > that'll hit array_out, which uses iterators.
>
> Hmm, probably those results are swamped by I/O functions though.
I did check with a quick profile, and the iteration itself is a
significant part of the total execution time.
> I'd suggest trying something that exercises array_map(), which
> it looks like means doing an array coercion. Perhaps like so:
> do $$
> declare a int4[];
> x int;
> begin
> a := array(select generate_series(1,1000));
> for i in 1..100000 loop
> x := array_length(a::int8[], 1);
> end loop;
> end$$;
with the loop count set to 10000 instead, I get:
before:
after:
tps = 20.940092 (including connections establishing)
after:
tps = 20.568730 (including connections establishing)
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-05-11 01:53:45 | Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs (Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-11 01:34:15 | Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs (Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API) |