From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Ronan Dunklau <ronan(dot)dunklau(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Sim Zacks <sim(at)compulab(dot)co(dot)il>, ebehn(at)arinc(dot)com, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Array of composite types returned from python |
Date: | 2014-07-02 05:55:14 |
Message-ID: | 21954.1404280514@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ronan Dunklau <ronan(dot)dunklau(at)dalibo(dot)com> writes:
> Le dimanche 29 juin 2014 16:54:03 Tom Lane a =E9crit :
>> 1. While I think the patch does what it intends to, it's a bit distressing
>> that it will invoke the information lookups in PLyObject_ToComposite over
>> again for *each element* of the array. We probably ought to quantify that
>> overhead to see if it's bad enough that we need to do something about
>> improving caching, as speculated in the comment in PLyObject_ToComposite.
> I don't know how to do that without implementing the cache itself.
I don't either, but my thought was that we could hack up a simple
one-element cache pretty trivially, eg static info and desc variables
in PLyObject_ToComposite that are initialized the first time through.
You could only test one composite-array type per session with that
sort of kluge, but that would be good enough for doing some simple
performance testing.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2014-07-02 06:01:02 | Re: WAL format and API changes (9.5) |
Previous Message | Abhijit Menon-Sen | 2014-07-02 05:51:53 | Re: 9.5 CF1 |