Re: Simple (hopefully) throughput question? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Nick Matheson
Subject Re: Simple (hopefully) throughput question?
Date
Msg-id 4CD2C640.8030303@noaa.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Simple (hopefully) throughput question?  (Andy Colson <andy@squeakycode.net>)
Responses Re: Simple (hopefully) throughput question?
List pgsql-performance
Pierre-

Reading from the tables is very fast, what bites you is that postgres
has to convert the data to wire format, send it to the client, and the
client has to decode it and convert it to a format usable by your
application. Writing a custom aggregate in C should be a lot faster
since it has direct access to the
data itself. The code path from actual table data to an aggregate is
much shorter than from table data to the client...


I think your comments really get at what our working hypothesis was, but
given that our experience is limited compared to you all here on the
mailing lists we really wanted to make sure we weren't missing any
alternatives. Also the writing of custom aggregators will likely
leverage any improvements we make to our storage throughput.

Thanks,

Nick


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Nick Matheson
Date:
Subject: Re: Simple (hopefully) throughput question?
Next
From: Vitalii Tymchyshyn
Date:
Subject: Re: Simple (hopefully) throughput question?