Re: extensible enum types

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, having to do a cache lookup already makes it a couple orders of
>> magnitude more expensive than an OID comparison. However, it's hard to
>> say how much that matters in terms of total application performance.
>> We really could do with a bit of performance testing here ...

> I have done some. The performance hit is fairly horrible. Adding cache
> lookups for the enum rows to the comarison routines made a REINDEX on a
> 1m row table where the index is on an enum column (the enum has 500
> randomly ordered labels) jump from around 10s to around 70s.

Hmmm... that's bad, but I bet it's still less than the cost of comparing
NUMERICs. Also, did you make any attempt to avoid repetitive cache
lookups by storing a pointer in fn_extra (cf array comparisons)?

regards, tom lane