Thread
-
Idea for minor tstore optimization
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> — 2008-02-27T20:33:25Z
I notice that several of the call sites of tuplestore_puttuple() start with arrays of datums and nulls, call heap_form_tuple(), and then switch into the tstore's context and call tuplestore_puttuple(), which deep-copies the HeapTuple into the tstore. ISTM it would be faster and simpler to provide a tuplestore_putvalues(), which just takes the datum + nulls arrays and avoids the additional copy. -Neil
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2008-02-27T22:48:53Z
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes: > I notice that several of the call sites of tuplestore_puttuple() start > with arrays of datums and nulls, call heap_form_tuple(), and then switch > into the tstore's context and call tuplestore_puttuple(), which > deep-copies the HeapTuple into the tstore. ISTM it would be faster and > simpler to provide a tuplestore_putvalues(), which just takes the datum > + nulls arrays and avoids the additional copy. Seems reasonable. Check whether tuplesort should offer the same, while you are at it. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2008-03-22T23:47:12Z
Added to TODO: * Avoid tuple some tuple copying in sort routines http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg01206.php --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Lane wrote: > Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes: > > I notice that several of the call sites of tuplestore_puttuple() start > > with arrays of datums and nulls, call heap_form_tuple(), and then switch > > into the tstore's context and call tuplestore_puttuple(), which > > deep-copies the HeapTuple into the tstore. ISTM it would be faster and > > simpler to provide a tuplestore_putvalues(), which just takes the datum > > + nulls arrays and avoids the additional copy. > > Seems reasonable. Check whether tuplesort should offer the same, while > you are at it. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2008-03-23T01:20:32Z
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > Added to TODO: > * Avoid tuple some tuple copying in sort routines > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg01206.php Actually ... isn't this done already? http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-02/msg00176.php regards, tom lane
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2008-03-23T01:21:49Z
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > Added to TODO: > > * Avoid tuple some tuple copying in sort routines > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg01206.php > > Actually ... isn't this done already? > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-02/msg00176.php Yea, removed because I thought you just did it. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2008-03-23T01:24:34Z
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Actually ... isn't this done already? >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-02/msg00176.php > Yea, removed because I thought you just did it. Oh, wait, that's just a -patches entry; it doesn't look like Neil ever committed it. Neil, how come? regards, tom lane
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2008-03-23T01:31:03Z
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Actually ... isn't this done already? > >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-02/msg00176.php > > > Yea, removed because I thought you just did it. > > Oh, wait, that's just a -patches entry; it doesn't look like Neil > ever committed it. Neil, how come? I thought this was Neil's commit that you just did: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2008-03/msg00439.php but I see now this was another patch queue patch. I have re-added the TODO item and included your URL. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2008-03-23T01:41:58Z
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Oh, wait, that's just a -patches entry; it doesn't look like Neil >> ever committed it. Neil, how come? > I thought this was Neil's commit that you just did: No, the one I just put in was the one you have listed under "Avoid needless copy in nodeMaterial". That should be removed, but the tstore optimization thread is still live. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2008-03-23T01:51:39Z
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Oh, wait, that's just a -patches entry; it doesn't look like Neil > >> ever committed it. Neil, how come? > > > I thought this was Neil's commit that you just did: > > No, the one I just put in was the one you have listed under "Avoid > needless copy in nodeMaterial". That should be removed, but the > tstore optimization thread is still live. I am thinking I need a todo queue separate from the patches queue, except I often can't figure out which is which until I am done. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
-
Re: Idea for minor tstore optimization
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> — 2008-03-25T19:33:20Z
On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 21:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Oh, wait, that's just a -patches entry; it doesn't look like Neil > ever committed it. Neil, how come? Sorry, slipped through the cracks -- I've now committed the patch. -Neil