| From: | Nikhils <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: plpgsql: penalty due to double evaluation of parameters |
| Date: | 2008-05-21 13:20:02 |
| Message-ID: | d3c4af540805210620m499a5d49paf90294cdb97e805@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
I don't buy the performance argument unless I see some test results
> demonstrating it; exec_prepare_plan is only called on the first invocation
> of a statement. What kind of side-effects could exec_eval_datum call have?
>
Note that I have avoided using the "performance" word for this very reason.
But consider for example when the datum type is PLPGSQL_DTYPE_REC. I dont
think its justified to have the overhead of heap_copytuple_with_tuple, when
all we need is just the typeid! Similar arguments apply for other datums
like PLPGSQL_DTYPE_ROW, PLPGSQL_DTYPE_TRIGARG e.g.
Regards,
Nikhils
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2008-05-21 13:37:37 | Re: idea: storing view source in system catalogs |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2008-05-21 13:09:49 | Re: Posible planner improvement? |