Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> writes: >> Probably so. I'll try to scrounge up some time to test the >> performance impact of your patch.
> Not the most scientific of tests, but I think a reasonable one: > ... > 2.7% performance penalty Thanks. While that's not awful, it's enough to be annoying. I think we could mitigate this by allocating the argument context once in nodeFunctionscan setup, and passing it into ExecMakeTableFunctionResult; so we'd only do a memory context reset not a create/delete in each cycle. That would make the patch a bit more invasive, but not much. Back-patchability would depend on whether you think there's any third party code calling ExecMakeTableFunctionResult; I kinda doubt that, but I wonder if anyone has a different opinion. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers