Re: [HACKERS] loading libraries on Postmaster startup

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: "Patches (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] loading libraries on Postmaster startup
Date: 2003-02-22 19:22:03
Message-ID: 24832.1045941723@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> In my testing with PL/R, it reduces the first call to a PL/R function
> (after connecting) from almost 2 seconds, down to about 8 ms.

Hm, pretty significant. Can you measure any per-fork cost (ie, the loss
incurred by children that don't use PL/R)? Is there any measurable
benefit for our other PLs (plperl etc)?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joe Conway 2003-02-22 20:40:44 Re: [HACKERS] loading libraries on Postmaster startup
Previous Message Joe Conway 2003-02-22 19:09:34 Re: [HACKERS] loading libraries on Postmaster startup

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joe Conway 2003-02-22 20:40:44 Re: [HACKERS] loading libraries on Postmaster startup
Previous Message Joe Conway 2003-02-22 19:09:34 Re: [HACKERS] loading libraries on Postmaster startup