| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, "kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ResourceOwner refactoring |
| Date: | 2021-01-18 16:11:10 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobYE99Ka5rc+-Z_LQnWFWWhmeEDEtEm_f4-Av_47swjcg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:19 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
>
> On 18/01/2021 16:34, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > So according to your performance benchmark, we're willing to accept a
> > 30% performance loss on an allegedly common operation -- numkeep=0
> > numsnaps=10 becomes 49.8ns from 37.6ns. That seems a bit shocking.
> > Maybe you can claim that these operations aren't exactly hot spots, and
> > so the fact that we remain in the same power-of-ten is sufficient. Is
> > that the argument?
>
> That's right. The fast path is fast, and that's important. The slow path
> becomes 30% slower, but that's acceptable.
>
> - Heikki
>
>
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2021-01-18 16:11:57 | Re: ResourceOwner refactoring |
| Previous Message | Laurenz Albe | 2021-01-18 16:11:08 | Re: Add session statistics to pg_stat_database |