Hi,
On 2022-06-24 10:29:06 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 2022-06-23 Th 21:51, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2022-06-23 16:38:12 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 05:41:07PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>> Yes, but I don't guarantee to have a fix in time for Beta2.
> >> IMHO, it would be nice to get something done for beta2. Now the
> >> thread is rather fresh and I guess that more performance study is
> >> required even for 0004, so..
> > I don't think there's a whole lot of performance study needed for 0004 - the
> > current state is obviously wrong.
> >
> > I think Andrew's beta 2 comment was more about my other architectural
> > complains around the json expression eval stuff.
>
>
> Right. That's being worked on but it's not going to be a mechanical fix.
Any updates here?
I'd mentioned the significant space use due to all JsonCoercionsState for all
the types. Another related aspect is that this code is just weird - the same
struct name (JsonCoercionsState), nested in each other?
struct JsonCoercionsState
{
struct JsonCoercionState
{
JsonCoercion *coercion; /* coercion expression */
ExprState *estate; /* coercion expression state */
} null,
string,
numeric ,
boolean,
date,
time,
timetz,
timestamp,
timestamptz,
composite;
} coercions; /* states for coercion from SQL/JSON item
* types directly to the output type */
Also note the weird numeric indentation that pgindent does...
> The attached very small patch applies on top of your 0002 and deals with
> the FmgrInfo complaint.
Now that the FmgrInfo is part of a separately allocated struct, that doesn't
seem necessary anymore.
- Andres
