| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Atsushi Ogawa <a_ogawa(at)hi-ho(dot)ne(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Reduce the memcpy call from SearchCatCache |
| Date: | 2009-07-07 14:22:06 |
| Message-ID: | 6020.1246976526@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Atsushi Ogawa <a_ogawa(at)hi-ho(dot)ne(dot)jp> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> There are cases where cache lookups happen recursively.
> I tested regression test and pgbench. However, I did not consider
> recursive case. I revised a patch for safe recursive call.
> But I cannot find test case in which recursive call happens.
Try turning on CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS or CLOBBER_CACHE_RECURSIVELY to
get a demonstration of what can happen under the right conditions.
I think the only really safe way to do what you propose would be to
refactor the ScanKey API to separate the datum values and is-null
flags from the more static parts of the data structure. That would
be a pretty large/invasive patch, and the numbers cited here don't
seem to me to justify the work. It's even possible that it could
end up being a net performance loss due to having to pass around more
pointers :-(
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-07-07 14:28:24 | Re: Small foreign key error message improvement |
| Previous Message | Atsushi Ogawa | 2009-07-07 13:03:11 | Re: Reduce the memcpy call from SearchCatCache |