Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: WIP patch: convert SQL-language functions to returntuplestores

From: Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIP patch: convert SQL-language functions to returntuplestores
Date: 2008-10-28 13:32:52
Message-ID: 20081028133252.GH27578@it.is.rice.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 09:28:38AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 21:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> So I'm concluding that we can easily afford to switch to
> >> tuplestore-always operation, especially if we are willing to put any
> >> effort into tuplestore optimization.  (I note that the current
> >> tuplestore code writes 24 bytes per row for this example, which is a
> >> shade on the high side for only 4 bytes payload.  It looks like it
> >> would be pretty easy to knock 10 bytes off that for a 40% savings in
> >> I/O volume.)
> 
> > That seems like an important, possibly more important, change.
> 
> Yeah, seeing that both WITH and window functions will be stressing
> tuplestore performance, anything we can save there is probably worth the
> trouble.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
The pre-sort for index builds would also benefit from this change.

Ken

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2008-10-28 13:45:03
Subject: Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-10-28 13:28:38
Subject: Re: WIP patch: convert SQL-language functions to return tuplestores

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group