From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Eric Ridge <ebr(at)tcdi(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: User Defined Functions/AM's inherently slow? |
Date: | 2004-01-18 06:34:00 |
Message-ID: | 400A28D8.3070104@familyhealth.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> Theory B would be that there's some huge overhead in calling non-built-in
>> functions on your platform. We do know that looking up a "C" function is
>> significantly more expensive than looking up a "builtin" function, but
>> there should only be half a dozen such calls involved in this test case;
>> it's hard to credit that that takes 200 msec. Does the time drop at all
>> on second and subsequent repetitions in a single backend run?
>
>
> Yes, it drops from about .680ms to the .250ish that I posted.
>
> I suppose I should try compiling this little stub into postgres, eh?
What if you try the new preload_libraries (or whatever it's called)
config variable in postgresql.conf in the 7.4 release?
Chris
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Eric Ridge | 2004-01-18 06:49:27 | Re: User Defined Functions/AM's inherently slow? |
Previous Message | Eric Ridge | 2004-01-18 04:46:32 | Re: User Defined Functions/AM's inherently slow? |