| From: | Thomas Hallgren <thomas(at)tada(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Inefficient bytea escaping? |
| Date: | 2006-05-29 06:01:07 |
| Message-ID: | 447A8E23.2040108@tada.se |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 5/28/06, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> wrote:
>> With -lpthread
>> lock.enabled 323s
>> lock.disabled 50s
>> lock.unlocked 36s
>
> I forgot to test with -lpthread, my bad. Indeed by default
> something less expensive that full locking is going on.
>
>> The crux of the matter is though, if you're calling something a million
>> times, you're better off trying to find an alternative anyway. There is
>> a certain amount of overhead to calling shared libraries and no amount
>> of optimisation of the library is going save you that.
>
> The crux of the matter was if its possible to use fwrite
> as easy string combining mechanism and the answer is no,
> because it's not lightweight enough.
>
IIRC the windows port make use of multi-threading to simulate signals and it's likely that
some add-on modules will bring in libs like pthread. It would be less ideal if PostgreSQL
was designed to take a significant performance hit when that happens. Especially if a viable
alternative exists.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-05-29 06:52:13 | Re: LIKE, leading percent, bind parameters and indexes |
| Previous Message | PFC | 2006-05-29 05:10:03 | Re: pg_proc probin misuse |