On 16/07/14 21:35, Pavel Stehule wrote:
The performance difference is about 20% (+/- few depending on the
array size), I don't know if that's bad enough to warrant
type-specific implementation. I personally don't know how to make
the generic implementation much faster than it is now, except maybe
by turning it into aggregate which would cache the deconstructed
version of the array, but that change semantics quite a bit and is
probably not all that desirable.
I am not sure if our API is enough to do it - there are no any simple
support for immutable parameters.
Just to clarify, the ~20% performance difference is with separate
generic implementation for fixed width types (most of the time seems to
be spent in the FunctionCallInvoke part, I even tryed to use sortsupport
instead but it does not seem to help much).
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: