Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] char types gone.

From: dg(at)illustra(dot)com (David Gould)
To: darrenk(at)insightdist(dot)com (Darren King)
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] char types gone.
Date: 1998-03-24 19:17:40
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > > I don't know how big of a performance boost it provides in the cache, but
> > > removing the functions associated with the char types shrank the pg_proc
> > > table from 906 to 842 entries or a bit over 7%.

No performance impact.

> > > Want to shrink it further?  Of those remaining 842, _230_ are for the geometric
> > > types!  Throw in 25 more for the cash/money functions.  Bloat city if you
> > > never use these things.  Thirty percent could be moved out to contrib and
> > > not missed by most postgres users.
> > 
> > Yes, but if they are never referenced, the cache is empty for those
> > types.  Unless there is some performance change with their removal, why
> > remove them?  Disk space of binary?
> How does the cache really work then? Does one pg disk block map to one buffer?
> When you say "the cache is empty for those types.", what do you mean?

The function cache has one entry for each function in use. If a function has
never been called, then no cache entry is ever created for it. The cache
is organized per function, it is not part of the buffer / page cache so
each entry only takes a few bytes.


David Gould            dg(at)illustra(dot)com           510.628.3783 or 510.305.9468 
Informix Software  (No, really)         300 Lakeside Drive  Oakland, CA 94612
 - Linux. Not because it is free. Because it is better.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hal SnyderDate: 1998-03-24 19:23:30
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Postgres "in the field"
Previous:From: David GouldDate: 1998-03-24 19:10:10
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Data type removal

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group