From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeevan Ladhe <jeevan(dot)ladhe(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Binary search in fmgr_isbuiltin() is a bottleneck. |
Date: | 2017-09-28 22:56:36 |
Message-ID: | 20170928225636.5zpkcgorw5odfb5s@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-09-28 18:52:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > I might be worse than you... But anyway, here's a patch doing
> > so. Looking at profiles, it turned out that having the integer limits as
> > extern variables in a different TU isn't a great idea.
>
> Uh, what? Access to fmgr_nbuiltins shouldn't be part of any critical path
> anymore after this change.
Indeed. But the size of the the oid -> fmgr_builtins index array is
relevant now. We could of course just make that dependent on
FirstBootstrapObjectId, but that'd waste some memory.
> > So I moved what
> > used to be fmgrtab.c to fmgrtab.h, and included it directly in fmgr.c.
>
> I'm kind of -0.5 on that. I believe part of the argument for having
> things set up as they were was to allow external code to access the
> fmgr_builtins table (as my speed-test hack earlier today did).
You could still do that, you'd just end up with a second copy. Doesn't
seem bad for such an uncommon case.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2017-09-28 22:59:01 | Re: GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 8) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-28 22:52:28 | Re: Binary search in fmgr_isbuiltin() is a bottleneck. |