On 2016-07-31 22:26:00 +0100, Greg Stark wrote: > I think you're looking at this the wrong way around. 30% of what? > You're doing these simple read-only selects on a database that > obviously is entirely in RAM. If you do the math on the numbers you > gave above the simple protocol took 678 microseconds per transaction > and the extended protocol took 876 microseconds. The difference is 198 > microseconds. I'm not sure exactly where those 200us are going and > perhaps it could be lower but in what real-world query is it going to > have a measurable impact on the total time?
FWIW, I've observed the same with (a bit) more complicated queries. A part of this is that the extended protocol simply does more. PQsendQueryGuts() sends Parse/Bind/Describe/Execute/Sync - that's simply more work and data over the wire than a single Q message. Whether that matters for a given workload or not, is a different question, but I think it's pretty clear that it can for some. Shay, are you using unnamed or named portals? There's already a shortcut path for the former in some places. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers