Re: [HACKERS] Does having a NULL column automatically exclude thetable from the tupleDesc cache?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ryan Murphy
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Does having a NULL column automatically exclude thetable from the tupleDesc cache?
Дата
Msg-id CAHeEsBeRqnNky99WpwQ1-gSYTTQUj17do8of+DL4LxTEh3+RUw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Does having a NULL column automatically exclude thetable from the tupleDesc cache?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения

> You'll probably want to do those at a C level, bypassing the executor. I
> would guess that executor overhead will completely swamp the effect of the
> cache in most cases.

That seems like it's kind of missing the point.  If the tupleDesc
cache saves so little that it's irrelevant when tested through the
executor, it's not a very useful cache.  I bet that's not the case,
though.

Thank you both for your insight.  I'll probably hold off on the benchmarks for right now.  I didn't have a production reason to worry about the cache, just getting more familiar with the codebase.  Thanks again!
 

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Erik Rijkers
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication existing data copy - commentsorigin.c
Следующее
От: Dilip Kumar
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Parallel bitmap heap scan