Re: Calling conventions - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: Calling conventions
Date
Msg-id 4A6070270200002500028933@gw.wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Calling conventions  (Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>)
Responses Re: Calling conventions  (Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>)
List pgsql-performance
Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org> wrote:

> I have implemented the very same algorithm in both a Postgres GiST
> extension and as a standalone Java program. In general, the
> standalone Java program performs about 100 times faster than
> Postgres when running a large index-based nested loop join.
>
> I profiled Postgres a few weeks back, and found a large amount of
> time being spent in fmgr_oldstyle.

I've seen the code in Java outperform the same code in optimized C,
because the "just in time" compiler can generate native code optimized
for the actual code paths being taken rather than a compile-time guess
at that, but a factor of 100?  Something else has to be going on here
beyond an interface layer.  Is this all in RAM with the Java code,
versus having disk access in PostgreSQL?

-Kevin

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Calling conventions
Next
From: "Haszlakiewicz, Eric"
Date:
Subject: Re: Concurrency issue under very heay loads