On 12/3/23 14:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 2023-12-03 Su 14:24, Joe Conway wrote:
>> On 12/3/23 11:03, Joe Conway wrote:
>>> On 12/3/23 10:10, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>>> I realize this is just a POC, but I'd prefer to see
>>>> composite_to_json()
>>>> not exposed. You could use the already public datum_to_json() instead,
>>>> passing JSONTYPE_COMPOSITE and F_RECORD_OUT as the second and third
>>>> arguments.
>>>
>>> Ok, thanks, will do
>>
>> Just FYI, this change does loose some performance in my not massively
>> scientific A/B/A test:
>>
>> 8<---------------------------
<snip>
>> 8<---------------------------
>>
>> That is somewhere in the 3% range.
>
> I assume it's because datum_to_json() constructs a text value from which
> you then need to extract the cstring, whereas composite_to_json(), just
> gives you back the stringinfo. I guess that's a good enough reason to go
> with exposing composite_to_json().
Yeah, that was why I went that route in the first place. If you are good
with it I will go back to that. The code is a bit simpler too.
--
Joe Conway
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com