Re: Improved scanner performance

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Improved scanner performance
Date: 2002-04-20 05:03:14
Message-ID: 18977.1019278994@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> I had the idea that -CF would enlarge the lexer tables quite a bit ---
>> what's the change in executable size?)

> +150 kB

> I've also looked at -CFe, which is supposedly the next slowest level, but
> it doesn't do nearly as well.

Ouch; that sounds like about a ten percent increase in the size of
the backend executable. That's enough to reach my threshold of pain;
is the long-literal issue worth that much?

How much of your reported improvement is due to -CFa, and how much to
the coding improvements you made?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-04-20 05:27:08 Re: general design question
Previous Message Curt Sampson 2002-04-20 04:55:38 Re: general design question