Re: Extensions, this time with a patch

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, David E(dot) Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Extensions, this time with a patch
Date: 2010-10-22 19:43:56
Message-ID: m2pqv23tdv.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> For information, when we talk about performance problem, please note
> that on my workstation with a default setup (not that it's important
> here) we're talking about 86,420 ms for a loop of 100
> perform * from pg_extensions;

That's right, but

> That displays 36 extensions and needs to parse their files twice and for
> some of them need to scan the directory and parse other extension
> control files before to get to the right one. Average less than 1ms to
> do all that on my workstation, and typically less than 3ms if you
> include psql side of things.

That's not what happens, the pg_extensions() SRF will scan the directory
once and parse each control file once, of course. I'm tired enough to
mix the behaviour of finding the control file given *one* extension name
at CREATE EXTENSION time with listing all available extensions. Sorry
for the noise.

In my mind though, the baseline remains the same. Now I will have a
sleep and prepare for holidays, in some meaningful order…

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-10-22 19:54:01 Re: Integer input functions for date and timestamp
Previous Message Dimitri Fontaine 2010-10-22 19:21:14 Re: Extensions, this time with a patch