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
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Martijn van Oosterhout||Date: 2006-05-29 06:52:13|
|Subject: Re: LIKE, leading percent, bind parameters and indexes|
|Previous:||From: PFC||Date: 2006-05-29 05:10:03|
|Subject: Re: pg_proc probin misuse |