Re: Performance Implications of Using Exceptions

From: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Ravi Chemudugunta <chemuduguntar(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance Implications of Using Exceptions
Date: 2008-04-09 20:00:12
Message-ID: C2580AE6-86E0-4525-963C-5A47DC9CF579@decibel.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Mar 31, 2008, at 8:23 PM, Ravi Chemudugunta wrote:
>> In general I would recommend that you benchmark them using
>> as-close-to-real load as possible again as-real-as-possible data.
>
> I am running a benchmark with around 900,000 odd records (real-load on
> the live machine :o ) ... should show hopefully some good benchmarking
> results for the two methods.

Please do, and please share. I know the docs say that exception
blocks make things "significantly" more expensive, but I think that
the community also sometimes loses the forest for the tree. Setting
up a savepoint (AFAIK that's the actual expense in the exception
block) is fairly CPU-intensive, but it's not common for a database
server to be CPU-bound, even for OLTP. You're usually still waiting
on disk.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Decibel! 2008-04-09 20:09:45 Re: Performance with temporary table
Previous Message PFC 2008-04-09 18:41:29 Re: EXPLAIN detail