Re: [BUGS] BUG #13493: pl/pgsql doesn't scale with cpus (PG9.3, 9.4)

This is a reply to to Andreas's post on the #13495 documentation thread in -bugs.
I am responding to it here because it relates to #13493 only.

Andres wrote, re: #13493

>> This issue is absolutely critical for performance and scalability of code,

> Pft. In most cases it doesn't actually matter that much because the
> contained query are the expensive stuff. It's just when you do lots of
> very short and cheap things that it has such a big effect.  Usually the
> effect on the planner is bigger.

Hi Andres,

'Pft' is kinda rude - I wouldn't comment on it normally,  but seeing as you just lectured me on -performance on
somethingyou perceived as impolite (just like you lectured me on not spreading things onto multiple threads), can you
pleasetry to set a good example? You don't encourage new contributors into open source communities this way.  

Getting to the point. I think the gap between our viewpoints comes from the fact I (and others here at my institute)
havea bunch of pl/pgsql code here with for loops and calculations, which we see as 'code'. Thinking of all the users I
knowmyself, I know there are plenty of GIS people out there using for loops and pgsql to simulate models on data in the
DB,and I expect the same is true among e.g. older scientists with DB datasets.  

Whereas it sounds like you and Tom see pl/pgsql as 'glue' and don't see any problem. As I have never seen statistics on
pl/pgsqluse-cases among users at large, I don't know what happens everywhere else outside of GIS-world and pgdev-world.
Haveyou any references/data you can share on that? I would be interested to know because I don't want to overclaim on
theimportance of these bugs or any other bugs in future. In this case, #13493 wrecked the code for estimates on a 20
millioneuro national roadbuilding project here and it cost me a few weeks of my life, but for all I know you're totally
rightabout the general importance to the world at large. 

Though keep in mind: This isn't just only about scaling up one program. It's a db-level problem. If you have a large
GISDB server with many users, long-running queries etc. on large amounts of data, then you only need e.g. 2-3 people to
berunning some code with for-loops or a long series of calculation in pl/pgsql, and everything will fall apart in
pgsql-land. 

Last point. When I wrote 'absolutely critical' I was under the impression this bug could have some serious impact on
postgis/pgrouting.Since I wanted to double check what you said about 'expensive stuff' vs 'short/cheap stuff', I ran
somebenchmarks to check on a few functions.  

You are right that only short, looped things are affected. e.g. for loops with calculations and so on. Didn't see any
troublewith the calls I made to postgis inside or outside of pgsql. This confirms/replicates your findings. Updated
numbers/testsposted to github shortly. 

Regards

Graeme Bell