From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | ojford(at)gmail(dot)com |
Cc: | krasiyan(at)gmail(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk, david(at)fetter(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Add RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS and FROM FIRST/LAST options |
Date: | 2025-02-28 11:48:51 |
Message-ID: | 20250228.204851.1356677729897999622.ishii@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> BTW, I noticed that in the code path where
>> ignorenulls_getfuncarginframe() is called, WinSetMarkPosition() is
>> never called?
>>
>> Attached version uses the mark_pos at the end.
I did simple performance test against v8.
EXPLAIN ANALYZE
SELECT
x,
nth_value(x,2) IGNORE NULLS OVER w
FROM generate_series(1,$i) g(x)
WINDOW w AS (ORDER BY x ROWS BETWEEN 2 PRECEDING AND 2 FOLLOWING);
I changed $i = 1k, 2k, 3k, 4k, 5k... 10k and got this:
Number Time (ms)
of rows
----------------
1000 28.977
2000 96.556
3000 212.019
4000 383.615
5000 587.05
6000 843.23
7000 1196.177
8000 1508.52
9000 1920.593
10000 2514.069
As you can see, when the number of rows = 1k, it took 28 ms. For 10k
rows, it took 2514 ms, which is 86 times slower than the 1k case. Can
we enhance this?
Graph attached.
Best reagards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS K.K.
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
![]() |
image/png | 21.9 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2025-02-28 11:52:29 | Re: Changing shared_buffers without restart |
Previous Message | Alena Rybakina | 2025-02-28 11:48:47 | Re: Replace IN VALUES with ANY in WHERE clauses during optimization |