Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

On May 11, 2017 11:31:02 AM PDT, Tom Lane  wrote:
>Bruce Momjian  writes:
>> Good point.  I think we need to do some measurements to see if the
>> parser-only stage is actually significant.  I have a hunch that
>> commercial databases have much heavier parsers than we do.
>
>FWIW, gram.y does show up as significant in many of the profiles I
>take.
>I speculate that this is not so much that it eats many CPU cycles, as
>that
>the constant tables are so large as to incur lots of cache misses. 
>scan.l
>is not quite as big a deal for some reason, even though it's also
>large.

And that there's a lot of unpredictable branches, leading to a lot if pipeline stalls.

Andres
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.