On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 3:40 AM, Anatoly Vorobey <avoro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Tony, >> >> As you mentioned, we don't see any benefit to runtime selection of the >> storage engine; thus the indirect call is unnecessary in our environment. > > I'm curious about this choice. Have you tried to benchmark the benefit of > using a compile-time choice of a storage engine vs. indirect calls at > runtime? Do you happen to have any statistics on hand regarding whether that > change consistently influences latency/throughput?
If it turns out in benchmarks to really honestly be painful enough to warrant compiling with direct function calls, maybe a macro could be used that maps at compile-time either directly to one storage engine or to the run-time selected function pointer. Aaron > -- > Anatoly Vorobey, avoro...@gmail.com > http://avva.livejournal.com (Russian) > http://www.lovestwell.org (English) > >
