From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: test_json_parser/002_inline is kind of slow |
Date: | 2025-09-27 13:58:42 |
Message-ID: | b52b15fb-d9d8-40f2-9b6b-d64a1c31275a@dunslane.net |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025-09-26 Fr 8:06 PM, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 9:26 AM Jacob Champion
> <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> If it's truly just a few lines, then I've misunderstood what you're
>> suggesting (patches welcome). It's not the separator splitting that
>> I'm worried about, but the restructuring of the test.
> Here is a very slapdash attempt at pushing the "chunk size iteration"
> part of the tests down into the test executable, using null
> separators. I think it's ugly, but maybe not quite as bad as I feared.
> Unfortunately it only gives about a 4x speedup on my machine, and I
> was hoping for much more. (We should really expect this entire thing
> to run in a fraction of a second.)
>
> Let me know if you think the tradeoff is worth it for now; I can
> polish it up if so.
>
On my (Linux) test it went from 3.75s to 0.78s, nearly 80% reduction. I
think the reduction on Windows is likely to be more. So I think this is
worth doing.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Burd | 2025-09-27 14:03:14 | Re: [PATCH] Add tests for Bitmapset |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-09-27 13:40:05 | Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL |