| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Eng <eng(at)intranet(dot)greenplum(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Avg performance for int8/numeric |
| Date: | 2006-11-25 01:46:35 |
| Message-ID: | 4567A07B.6010900@paradise.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Luke Lonergan wrote:
> So, if I understand this correctly, we're calling Alloc and ContextAlloc 10
> times for every row being summed?
>
> There are approx 10M rows and the profile snippet below shows 100M calls to
> each of those.
>
Unless I've accidentally run gprof on the profile output for a 100M row
case I had lying around :-( ... I'll check
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2006-11-25 02:03:42 | Re: Avg performance for int8/numeric |
| Previous Message | Luke Lonergan | 2006-11-25 01:44:53 | Re: [PATCHES] Avg performance for int8/numeric |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2006-11-25 02:03:42 | Re: Avg performance for int8/numeric |
| Previous Message | Luke Lonergan | 2006-11-25 01:44:53 | Re: [PATCHES] Avg performance for int8/numeric |