I wrote:
> But wait: HEAD takes
> Time: 6632.709 ms (00:06.633)
> to do the same thing. So somehow the new-style SQL function
> stuff is very materially slower in this use-case, with or
> without this patch. I do not understand why.
"perf" tells me that in the fx3 test, a full third of the runtime
is spent inside stringToNode(), with about three-quarters of that
going into pg_strtok(). This makes no sense to me: we'll be reading
the prosqlbody of fx3(), sure, but that's not enormously long (about
1200 bytes). And pg_strtok() doesn't look remarkably slow. There's
no way this should be taking more time than raw parsing + parse
analysis, even for such a trivial query as "select $1 + $1".
There's been some talk of getting rid of our existing nodetree
storage format in favor of something more efficient. Maybe we
should put a higher priority on getting that done. But anyway,
that seems orthogonal to the current patch.
> Even without cross-query plan caching, I don't see why the
> patch isn't better than it is. It ought to be at least
> competitive with the unpatched code.
This remains true.
regards, tom lane
