Re: COPY FROM performance improvements

Tom,

On 8/10/05 8:37 AM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Luke, I dislike whacking people upside the head, but this discussion
> seems to presume that raw speed on Intel platforms is the only thing
> that matters. We have a few other concerns. Portability, readability,
> maintainability, and correctness all trump platform-specific
> optimizations. The COPY patch as presented lost badly on all those
> counts, and you are lucky that it didn't get rejected completely.

It's a pleasure working with you too Tom :-)

Until you present a result on platform that is faster than Alon's in the
code that was modified, our proof still stands that his is 20% faster than
yours.

Also, as we proved the last time the correctness argument was thrown in, we
can fix the bugs and still make it a lot faster - and I would stick to that
whether it's a PA-RISC, DEC Alpha, Intel or AMD or event Ultra Sparc.

PostgreSQL needs major improvement to compete with Oracle and even MySQL on
speed. No whacking on the head is going to change that.

- Luke