| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com>, 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: | 2018-09-25 20:17:23 |
| Message-ID: | 20180925201723.5w6ouwlpjf75dzgh@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2018-09-25 12:50:34 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-09-25 01:47:49 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Planning Time: 0.152 ms
> > JIT:
> > Functions: 4
> > Options: Inlining true, Optimization true, Expressions true, Deforming true
> > Timing: Generation 0.955 ms, Inlining 157.422 ms, Optimization 11.751 ms, Emission 11.454 ms, Total 181.582 ms
> > Execution Time: 184.197 ms
>
> With parallelism on, this is the aggregated cost of doing JIT
> compilation. I wonder if, in VERBOSE mode, we should separately display
> the cost of JIT for the leader. Comments?
I've pushed the change without that bit - it's just a few additional
lines if we want to change that.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chapman Flack | 2018-09-25 21:47:21 | clarify documentation of BGW_NEVER_RESTART ? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-09-25 20:11:15 | Re: BUG #15160: planner overestimates number of rows in join when there are more than 200 rows coming from CTE |