Re: [HACKERS] Faster methods for getting SPI results (460%improvement)
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Faster methods for getting SPI results (460%improvement) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20170407040445.ck5vxkvtmnqacl63@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Faster methods for getting SPI results (460%improvement) (Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Faster methods for getting SPI results (460%improvement)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-04-06 09:14:43 -0700, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 4/6/17 9:04 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 4/6/17 03:50, Craig Ringer wrote: > > > But otherwise, pending docs changes, I think it's ready for committer. > > > > My opinion is still that this is ultimately the wrong approach. The > > right fix for performance issues in PL/Python is to change PL/Python not > > to materialize the list of tuples. Now with this change we would be > > moving from two result materializations to one, but I think we are > > keeping the wrong one. > > That's an option for future improvement, but I see no way to accomplish that > without completely breaking plpy. Why? We could very well return a somewhat "smarter" object. Returning rows row-by-row if accessed via iterator, materializes when accessed via row offset. - Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: