Re: COPY FROM performance improvements

"Luke Lonergan" <LLonergan@greenplum.com> writes:
> Yes, I think one thing we've learned is that there are important parts
> of the code, those that are in the data path (COPY, sort, spill to
> disk, etc) that are in dire need of optimization.  For instance, the
> fgetc() pattern should be banned everywhere in the data path.

Luke, I dislike whacking people upside the head, but this discussion
seems to presume that raw speed on Intel platforms is the only thing
that matters.  We have a few other concerns.  Portability, readability,
maintainability, and correctness all trump platform-specific
optimizations.  The COPY patch as presented lost badly on all those
counts, and you are lucky that it didn't get rejected completely.

            regards, tom lane