From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Patches (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: polymorphic arguments and return type for PL/pgSQL |
Date: | 2003-06-30 17:53:03 |
Message-ID: | 3F0078FF.8080605@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Joe Conway wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> (It might be time to change the cache lookup into a hashtable instead of
>> a simple linear list search...)
>
> I could do that if you want, but do you really think it's worth it? How
> long does a linked list have to get before a hash table starts to be a
> win (this is something I've always wondered about anyway)?
I was about to start looking at the hash table implementation and have a
question. Do you think it would be better to do
1) a hash lookup by function oid to a linked list of different compiled
versions (for each set of argument/return types)
-or-
2) create hash key using a new structure that includes function oid,
return type, and argument types, and use that for direct lookup.
#1 looks easier, and given the waning hours might be more likely to get
finished. #2 is probably preferable, but a bit more work.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-30 18:36:29 | Re: polymorphic arguments and return type for PL/pgSQL |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-30 17:52:45 | Re: Postgresql.conf, initdb patch |