| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks |
| Date: | 2002-08-02 19:16:32 |
| Message-ID: | 14395.1028315792@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 10:39:47AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Actually, plpgsql is pretty expensive too. The thing to be benchmarking
>> is applications of plain old built-in-C functions and operators.
> I thought part of the justification for this was for the OpenACS
> guys; don't they write everything in TCL?
Not relevant. The concern about increasing FUNC_MAX_ARGS is the
overhead it might add to existing functions that don't need any
more arguments. Worst case for that (percentagewise) will be
small built-in functions, like say int4add.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | J. R. Nield | 2002-08-02 19:27:04 | Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2002-08-02 19:07:14 | Re: WAL file location |