Perhaps I'm not remembering correctly, but don't SQL functions still have an abnormally high cost of execution compared to plpgsql?
Want to try the same thing with a plpgsql function? On Thu, 2002-08-01 at 18:23, Neil Conway wrote: > Ok, here are some crude benchmarks to attempt to measure the effect of > changing FUNC_MAX_ARGS. The benchmark script executed: > > CREATE FUNCTION test_func(int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int) > RETURNS INTEGER AS 'SELECT $1 + $2 + $3 + $4 + $5 + $6 + $7 + $8' > LANGUAGE 'sql' VOLATILE; > > Followed by 30,000 calls of: > > SELECT test_func(i, i, i, i, i, i, i, i); > > (Where i was the iteration number) > > I ran the test several times and averaged the results -- the wall-clock > time remained very consistent throughout the runs. Each execution of the > script took about 30 seconds. The machine was otherwise idle, and all > other PostgreSQL settings were at their default values. > > With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=16: > > 28.832 > 28.609 > 28.726 > 28.680 > > (average = 28.6 seconds) > > With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=32: > > 29.097 > 29.337 > 29.138 > 28.985 > 29.231 > > (average = 29.15 seconds) > > Cheers, > > Neil > > -- > Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
