On 16/07/14 21:35, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> The performance difference is about 20% (+/- few depending on the
> array size), I don't know if that's bad enough to warrant
> type-specific implementation. I personally don't know how to make
> the generic implementation much faster than it is now, except maybe
> by turning it into aggregate which would cache the deconstructed
> version of the array, but that change semantics quite a bit and is
> probably not all that desirable.
>
>
> I am not sure if our API is enough to do it - there are no any simple
> support for immutable parameters.
Just to clarify, the ~20% performance difference is with separate
generic implementation for fixed width types (most of the time seems to
be spent in the FunctionCallInvoke part, I even tryed to use sortsupport
instead but it does not seem to help much).
-- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services
