Robert Haas wrote:
> In a close race, I don't think we should get bogged down in
> micro-optimization here, both because micro-optimizations may not gain
> much and because what works well on one platform may not do much at
> all on another. The more general issue here is what to do about our
> high backend startup costs. Beyond trying to recycle backends for new
> connections, as I've previous proposed and with all the problems it
> entails, the only thing that looks promising here is to try to somehow
> cut down on the cost of populating the catcache and relcache, not that
> I have a very clear idea how to do that. This has to be a soluble
> problem because other people have solved it. To some degree we're a
> victim of our own flexible and extensible architecture here, but I
> find it pretty unsatisfying to just say, OK, well, we're slow.
Combining your last two sentences, I am not sure anyone with the
flexibility we have has solved the "cache populating" problem.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
