Re: Built-in binning functions

On 16/07/14 21:35, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>     The performance difference is about 20% (+/- few depending on the
>     array size), I don't know if that's bad enough to warrant
>     type-specific implementation. I personally don't know how to make
>     the generic implementation much faster than it is now, except maybe
>     by turning it into aggregate which would cache the deconstructed
>     version of the array, but that change semantics quite a bit and is
>     probably not all that desirable.
>
>
> I am not sure if our API is enough to do it - there are no any simple
> support for immutable parameters.

Just to clarify, the ~20% performance difference is with separate 
generic implementation for fixed width types (most of the time seems to 
be spent in the FunctionCallInvoke part, I even tryed to use sortsupport 
instead but it does not seem to help much).


--  Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services