| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org> |
| Cc: | cary huang <hcary328(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add support for AT LOCAL |
| Date: | 2023-10-06 06:05:12 |
| Message-ID: | ZR-jmKYU5BDQEAe4@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 03:49:03PM +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
> Okay. Here is a v3 using that approach.
You have not posted any numbers to show if there's a difference in
performance, so I have run a simple test:
PREPARE test AS SELECT TIMESTAMP '1978-07-07 19:38' AT LOCAL;
DO $$ BEGIN
FOR i IN 1..1000000 LOOP
EXECUTE 'EXECUTE test';
END LOOP;
END $$;
On a medium-ish benchmark machine I have (16 vCPUs, 32GB of memory,
-O2, no asserts), this DO block takes in average 4.3s to run with v2,
versus 3.6s with v3. So yes, that's faster.
I haven't yet finished my review of the patch, still looking at it.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-10-06 06:29:28 | Re: Add a new BGWORKER_BYPASS_ROLELOGINCHECK flag |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-10-06 05:30:16 | Re: Use FD_CLOEXEC on ListenSockets (was Re: Refactoring backend fork+exec code) |