I do not think there is much more to do, the timestamp is just a 64 bit
integer and you say an int takes 570ms/10920 calls and a timestamp takes
7130ms/8190 calls, this is about twice as much to get twice as much data.
Mikael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Dudziak" <tomdzk@gmail.com>
To: "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold@gmx.at>
Cc: <pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Performance problem with timestamps in result sets
On 3/8/06, Michael Paesold <mpaesold@gmx.at> wrote:
> This should be 1 ms per getTimestamp call, shouldn't it? The time is the
> aggregate time for ~8000 calls. That is still rather slow, yeah, but it is
> so with profiling.
Yep, but as I said, the others are much faster. E.g. getString takes
140ms for 5460 calls, and getInt 570ms for 10920 calls, so its
probably not so much the profiler.
Also, I was merely asking whether there is something that could be
done to bring getTimestamp at least in the same region.
cheers,
Tom
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
