Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks
Date
Msg-id 15509.1028583063@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Responses Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Well, in fact it's not just a question of disk space.

The following numbers are stats for total elapsed time of "make
installcheck" over ten trials:

NAMEDATALEN = 32, FUNC_MAX_ARGS = 16
 min  |  max  |  avg   |      stddev
-------+-------+--------+-------------------25.59 | 27.61 | 26.612 | 0.637003401351409

NAMEDATALEN = 64, FUNC_MAX_ARGS = 32
 min  |  max  |  avg   |     stddev
-------+-------+--------+-----------------26.32 | 29.27 | 27.415 | 1.0337982824947

NAMEDATALEN = 128, FUNC_MAX_ARGS = 32
 min  |  max  |  avg   |      stddev
-------+-------+--------+------------------27.44 | 30.79 | 29.603 | 1.26148105195622

I'm not sure about the trend of increasing standard deviation --- that
may reflect more disk I/O being done, and perhaps more checkpoints
occurring during the test.  But in any case it's clear that there's a
nontrivial runtime cost here.  Does a 10% slowdown bother you?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks
Next
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: PL/Perl?