On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 11:28:59AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> It might be acceptable to plan on improving the performance later,
> depending on just how bad it is now.
On 10M rows with 11 integers each, I'm seeing the following:
(format text)
Time: 10056.311 ms (00:10.056)
Time: 8789.331 ms (00:08.789)
Time: 8755.070 ms (00:08.755)
(format csv)
Time: 12295.480 ms (00:12.295)
Time: 12311.059 ms (00:12.311)
Time: 12305.469 ms (00:12.305)
(format json)
Time: 24568.621 ms (00:24.569)
Time: 23756.234 ms (00:23.756)
Time: 24265.730 ms (00:24.266)
'perf top' tends to look a bit like this:
13.31% postgres [.] appendStringInfoString
7.57% postgres [.] datum_to_json_internal
6.82% postgres [.] SearchCatCache1
5.35% [kernel] [k] intel_gpio_irq
3.57% postgres [.] composite_to_json
3.31% postgres [.] IsValidJsonNumber
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
