Re: counting pallocs
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: counting pallocs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4FB49A97.7010408@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | counting pallocs (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: counting pallocs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 17.05.2012 06:43, Robert Haas wrote: > The attached patch provides some rough instrumentation for determining > where palloc calls are coming from. This is obviously just for > noodling around with, not for commit, and there may well be bugs. But > enjoy. > > I gave this a quick spin on a couple of test workloads: a very short > pgbench test, a very short pgbench -S test, and the regression tests. > On the pgbench test, the top culprits are ExecInitExpr() and > expression_tree_mutator(); in both cases, the lappend() call for the > T_List case is the major contributor. Other significant contributors > include _copyVar(), which I haven't drilled into terribly far but > seems to be coming mostly from add_vars_to_targetlist(); > buildRelationAliases() via lappend, pstrdup, and makeString; > ExecAllocTupleTableSlot(); and makeColumnRef() via makeNode, lcons, > and makeString. What percentage of total CPU usage is the palloc() overhead in these tests? If we could totally eliminate the palloc() overhead, how much faster would the test run? -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: