Greetings,
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> > * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> >> I experimented with the attached, very quick-n-dirty patch to collect
> >> format_type results during the initial scan of pg_type, instead. On the
> >> regression database in HEAD, it reduces the number of queries pg_dump
> >> issues from 3260 to 2905; but I'm having a hard time detecting any net
> >> performance change.
>
> > Seems like the issue here is mainly just the latency of each query being
> > rather high compared to most use-cases, so local testing where there's
> > basically zero latency wouldn't see any change in timing, but throw a
> > trans-atlantic or worse amount of latency between the system running
> > pg_dump and the PG server and you'd see notable wall-clock savings in
> > time.
>
> Yeah. What I was more concerned about was the potential downside
> of running format_type() for each pg_type row, even though we might
> use only a few of those results. The fact that I'm *not* seeing
> a performance hit with a local server is encouraging from that
> standpoint.
Ah, yes, agreed.
Thanks!
Stephen