RE: Why overhead of SPI is so large?

From: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: 'Konstantin Knizhnik' <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Why overhead of SPI is so large?
Date: 2019-08-22 00:27:20
Message-ID: 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1FCF47FD@G01JPEXMBYT05
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

From: Konstantin Knizhnik [mailto:k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru]
> PL/pgSQL: 29044.361 ms
> C/SPI: 22785.597 ms
> The fact that difference between PL/pgSQL and function implemented in C
> using SPI is not so large was expected by me.

This PL/pgSQL overhead is not so significant compared with the three times, but makes me desire some feature like Oracle's ALTER PROCEDURE ... COMPILE; that compiles the PL/SQL logic to native code. I've seen a few dozen percent speed up.

Takayuki Tsunakawa

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2019-08-22 01:43:52 Re: Remove page-read callback from XLogReaderState.
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2019-08-22 00:08:10 Does TupleQueueReaderNext() really need to copy its result?