From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Scott Cain <cain(at)cshl(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PgSQL Performance ML <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [SQL] EXTERNAL storage and substring on long strings |
Date: | 2003-08-04 20:29:56 |
Message-ID: | 3F2EC244.9040107@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance pgsql-sql |
Scott Cain wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 11:53, Tom Lane wrote:
>>I find it really, really hard to believe that a crude reimplementation
>>in plpgsql of the TOAST concept could beat the built-in implementation
>>at all, let alone beat it by two orders of magnitude.
>>
>>Either there's something unrealistic about your testing of the
>>dna_string function, or your original tests are not causing TOAST to be
>>invoked in the expected way, or there's a bug we need to fix. I'd
>>really like to see some profiling of the poor-performing
>>external-storage case, so we can figure out what's going on.
>
> I was really hoping for a "Good job and glad to hear it" from you :-)
>
> I don't think there is anything unrealistic about my function or its
> testing, as it is very much along the lines of the types of things we do
> now. I will really try to do some profiling this week to help figure
> out what is going on.
Is there a sample table schema and dataset available (external-storage
case) that we can play with?
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2003-08-04 21:19:51 | Re: Indexes not used for "min()" |
Previous Message | Fernando Papa | 2003-08-04 20:17:36 | Re: I can't wait too much: Total runtime 432478.44 msec |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Anagha Joshi | 2003-08-05 10:21:52 | Timestamp in PG - 7.1 & 7.2 |
Previous Message | Matt Clark | 2003-08-04 16:56:00 | Re: [SQL] EXTERNAL storage and substring on long strings |