| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alon Goldshuv <agoldshuv(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: COPY FROM performance improvements |
| Date: | 2005-08-10 01:01:38 |
| Message-ID: | 42F951F2.8010104@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches pgsql-performance |
Alon Goldshuv wrote:
>I performed those measurement by executing *only the parsing logic* of the
>COPY pipeline. All data conversion (functioncall3(string...)) and tuple
>handling (form_heaptuple etc...) and insertion were manually disabled. So
>the only code measured is reading from disk and parsing to the attribute
>level.
>
>
Arguably this might exaggerate the effect quite significantly. Users
will want to know the real time effect on a complete COPY. Depending on
how much the pasing is in the total time your 20% improvement in parsing
might only be a small fraction of 20% improvement in COPY.
Like you, I'm happy we have seen a 5 times improvement in parsing. Is it
possible you can factor out something smallish from your patch that
might make up the balance?
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-08-10 03:05:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends |
| Previous Message | Alon Goldshuv | 2005-08-10 00:41:18 | Re: COPY FROM performance improvements |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Luke Lonergan | 2005-08-10 04:39:55 | Re: COPY FROM performance improvements |
| Previous Message | Alon Goldshuv | 2005-08-10 00:41:18 | Re: COPY FROM performance improvements |