On 09/21/2011 10:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> The other question that I'm going to be asking is whether it's not
> possible to get most of the same improvement with a much smaller code
> footprint. I continue to suspect that getting rid of the SQL function
> impedance-match layer (myFunctionCall2Coll etc) would provide most of
> whatever gain is to be had here, without nearly as large a cost in code
> size and maintainability, and with the extra benefit that the speedup
> would also be available to non-core datatypes.
>
>
Can we get a patch so we can do benchmarks on this?
cheers
andrew