Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks

Marc Fournier <scrappy@hub.org>

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>

To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@fourpalms.org>

Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, Neil Conway <nconway@klamath.dyndns.org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2002-08-02T06:55:01Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> > > With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=16:
> > > (average = 28.6 seconds)
> > > With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=32:
> > > (average = 29.15 seconds)
>
> That is almost a 2 percent cost. Shall we challenge someone to get us
> back 2 percent from somewhere before the 7.3 release? Optimizing a hot
> spot might do it...

The other side of the coin ... have you, in the past, gained enough
performance to allow us a 2% slip for v7.3?

Someone mentioned that the SQL spec called for a 128byte NAMELENTH ... is
there similar for FUNC_MAX_ARGS that we aren't adhering to?  Or is that
one semi-arbitrary?