Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks

Thanks. That looks acceptable to me, and a good test.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Neil Conway wrote:
> Ok, here are some crude benchmarks to attempt to measure the effect of
> changing FUNC_MAX_ARGS. The benchmark script executed:
>
> CREATE FUNCTION test_func(int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int)
> RETURNS INTEGER AS 'SELECT $1 + $2 + $3 + $4 + $5 + $6 + $7 + $8'
> LANGUAGE 'sql' VOLATILE;
>
> Followed by 30,000 calls of:
>
> SELECT test_func(i, i, i, i, i, i, i, i);
>
> (Where i was the iteration number)
>
> I ran the test several times and averaged the results -- the wall-clock
> time remained very consistent throughout the runs. Each execution of the
> script took about 30 seconds. The machine was otherwise idle, and all
> other PostgreSQL settings were at their default values.
>
> With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=16:
>
> 28.832
> 28.609
> 28.726
> 28.680
>
> (average = 28.6 seconds)
>
> With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=32:
>
> 29.097
> 29.337
> 29.138
> 28.985
> 29.231
>
> (average = 29.15 seconds)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Neil
>
> --
> Neil Conway <neilconway(at)rogers(dot)com>
> PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026