| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Query is over 2x slower with jit=on |
| Date: | 2018-08-22 16:51:55 |
| Message-ID: | 20180822165155.tjbib4pewnbiyy4x@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-08-22 18:39:18 +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
> Just to be clear; The query really runs slower (wall-clock time), it's not
> just the timing.
I bet it's not actually running slower, it "just" takes longer to start
up due to the JITing in each worker. I suspect what we should do is to
multiple the cost limits by the number of workers, to model that. But
without the fixed instrumentation that's harder to see...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Steele | 2018-08-22 16:56:01 | Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c) |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2018-08-22 16:49:40 | Re: Stored procedures and out parameters |