Re: arrays as pl/perl input arguments [PATCH]

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>
Cc: Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: arrays as pl/perl input arguments [PATCH]
Date: 2011-02-08 14:40:38
Message-ID: 4D5155E6.6040408@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02/03/2011 01:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>>> - Every existing plperl function that takes arrays is going to get
>>>> slower due to the overhead of parsing the string and allocating the
>>>> array and all its elements.
>>> Well, per my understanding of Alex changes, the string parsing is
>>> not invoked
>>> unless requested by referencing the array in a string context.
>>> Normally, onle
>>> plperl_ref_from_pg_array will be invoked every time the function is
>>> called
>>> with an array argument, which would take little time to convert the
>>> PostgreSQL
>>> internal array representation (not a string) to the perl references,
>>> but that's
>>> no different from what is already done with composite type
>>> arguments, which
>>> are converted to perl hash references on every corresponding
>>> function call.
>> I'd missed that it was using the internal array representation (obvious
>> in hindsight) but there's still a significant cost in allocating the SVs
>> that won't be used by existing code. Though I agree it's of the same
>> order as for composite types.
>>
>
> Well, the question seems to be whether or not it's a reasonable price
> to pay. On the whole I'm inclined to think it is, especially when it
> can be avoided by updating your code, which will be a saving in
> fragility and complexity as well.
>

Tim,

do you till have concerns about this, or are you happy for us to move
ahead on it?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hitoshi Harada 2011-02-08 14:44:54 Re: postponing some large patches to 9.2
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2011-02-08 14:05:15 Re: Named restore points