From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "eng(at)intranet(dot)greenplum(dot)com" <eng(at)intranet(dot)greenplum(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Avg performance for int8/numeric |
Date: | 2006-11-24 04:09:25 |
Message-ID: | 1164341365.23622.191.camel@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 11:08 +1300, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> - Modifies do_numeric_accum to have an extra bool parameter and does not
> calc sumX2 when it is false.
I think it would be clearer to reorganize this function slightly, and
have only a single branch on "useSumX2". On first glance it isn't
obviously that transdatums[2] is defined (but unchanged) when useSumX2
is false.
> Performance gain is approx 33%
Nice.
> (it is still slower than doing sum/count - possibly due to the
> construct/deconstruct overhead of the numeric transition array).
This would indeed be worth profiling. If it turns out that array
overhead is significant, I wonder if we could use a composite type for
the transition variable instead. That might also make it easier to
represent the "N" value as an int8 rather than a numeric.
-Neil
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-24 04:18:12 | Re: Avg performance for int8/numeric |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-11-24 04:06:05 | Re: Direct I/O issues |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-24 04:18:12 | Re: Avg performance for int8/numeric |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-11-24 04:06:05 | Re: Direct I/O issues |