Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks

Thanks.  That looks acceptable to me, and a good test.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Neil Conway wrote:
> Ok, here are some crude benchmarks to attempt to measure the effect of
> changing FUNC_MAX_ARGS. The benchmark script executed:
> 
> CREATE FUNCTION test_func(int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int)
> RETURNS INTEGER AS 'SELECT $1 + $2 + $3 + $4 + $5 + $6 + $7 + $8'
> LANGUAGE 'sql' VOLATILE;
> 
> Followed by 30,000 calls of:
> 
> SELECT test_func(i, i, i, i, i, i, i, i);
> 
> (Where i was the iteration number)
> 
> I ran the test several times and averaged the results -- the wall-clock
> time remained very consistent throughout the runs. Each execution of the
> script took about 30 seconds. The machine was otherwise idle, and all
> other PostgreSQL settings were at their default values.
> 
> With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=16:
> 
> 28.832
> 28.609
> 28.726
> 28.680
> 
> (average = 28.6 seconds)
> 
> With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=32:
> 
> 29.097
> 29.337
> 29.138
> 28.985
> 29.231
> 
> (average = 29.15 seconds)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Neil
> 
> -- 
> Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
> PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> 

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026