On Jan 14, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > What I would (as a non hacker) would look for is: > > (1) Generalized benchmarks between plpython(core) and plpython3u > > I know a lot of these are subjective, but it is still good to see if > there are any curves or points that bring the performance of either to > light.
I guess I could do some simple function I/O tests to identify invocation overhead(take a single parameter and return it). This should give a somewhat reasonable view of the trade-offs of "native typing" vs conversion performance-wise. One thing to keep in mind is that *three* tests would need to be done per parameter set: 1. plpython's 2. plpython3's (raw data objects/"native typing") 3. plpython3's + @pytypes The third should show degraded performance in comparison to plpythonu's whereas the second should show improvement or near equivalence. @pytypes is actually implemented in pure-Python, so the impact should be quite visible. http://python.projects.postgresql.org/pldocs/plpython3-postgres-pytypes.html I'm not sure there's anything else worth measuring. SRFs, maybe? > (2) Example of the traceback facility, I know it is silly but I don't > have time to actually download head, apply the patch and test this. Well, if you ever do find some time, the *easiest* way would probably be to download a branch snapshot from git.pg.org: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=plpython3.git;a=snapshot;h=refs/heads/plpython3;sf=tgz It requires Python 3.1. 3.0 has been abandoned by python.org. > This > type of thing, showing debugging facilities within the function would be > killer. The test output has a *lot* of tracebacks, so I'll just copy and paste one here. This one shows the traceback output of a chained exception. -- suffocates a pg error, and attempts to enter a protected area CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION pg_failure_suf_IFTE() RETURNS VOID LANGUAGE plpython3u AS $python$ import Postgres rp = Postgres.Type(Postgres.CONST['REGPROCEDUREOID']) def main(): try: fun = rp('nosuchfunc(int17,zzz)') except: # Should be valid, but the protection of # PL_DB_IN_ERROR should keep it from getting called. rp('pg_x_failure_suf()') $python$; SELECT pg_failure_suf_IFTE(); ERROR: database action attempted while in failed transaction CONTEXT: [exception from Python] Traceback (most recent call last): File "public.pg_failure_suf_ifte()", line 8, in main fun = rp('nosuchfunc(int17,zzz)') Postgres.Exception: type "int17" does not exist CODE: 42704 During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred: Traceback (most recent call last): File "public.pg_failure_suf_ifte()", line 12, in main rp('pg_x_failure_suf()') Postgres.Exception [public.pg_failure_suf_ifte()] > (3) A distinct real world comparison where the core plpython falls down > (if it does) against the plpython3u implementation Hrm. Are you looking for something that plpython3 can do that plpython can't? Or are you looking for something where plpython makes the user work a lot harder? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
