On 8 April 2012 20:51, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Applied with some cosmetic adjustments.


Having taken another look at the code, I wonder if we wouldn't have
been better off just fastpathing out of pgss_store in the first call
(in a pair of calls made by a backend as part an execution of some
non-prepared query) iff there is already an entry in the hashtable -
after all, we're now going to the trouble of acquiring the spinlock
just to increment the usage for the entry by 0 (likewise, every other
field), which is obviously superfluous. I apologise for not having
spotted this before submitting my last patch.

I have attached a patch with the modifications described.

This is more than a micro-optimisation, since it will cut the number
of spinlock acquisitions approximately in half for non-prepared

Peter Geoghegan       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

Attachment: pg_stat_statements_optimization_2012_04_08.patch
Description: Binary data

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to