Re: list rewrite committed
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: list rewrite committed |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 15359.1085724554@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: list rewrite committed (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: list rewrite committed
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes: >> If not, would something like a pg_bench exercise the new code enough to >> see the results? > Something like TPC-H would be better, I'd think. You'd only be likely to notice a difference in queries with hundreds of selected columns, CASE expressions with hundreds of alternatives, that kind of thing. I doubt that any of the standard benchmarks really stress this sort of problem. As Neil mentioned, we'd already tamped down the more common cases with the FastList kluge. But there definitely are cases that we'd not covered with FastList, some because it was notationally impractical and some because we'd just not noticed a problem. For instance, here http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-03/msg00696.php are some profiles documenting a case where nearly 40% of the runtime goes into lappend's in 7.4. I haven't had time to repeat the test case but I'd think that time is near-zero in CVS tip. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: