On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 05:35:10PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote: > I have not benchmarked the overhead, so maybe there is not much to > be concerned about. However, it just seems to me that tracking the extra > data for all cases just to only deal with corner cases does not seem like the > correct approach. This is what makes variant A the most attractive > approach.
I suspect that the overhead will be minimal for all the approaches I'm seeing on this thread, but it would not hurt to double-check all that. As the overhead of a single query jumbling is weightless compared to the overall query processing, the fastest method I've used in this area is a micro-benchmark with a hardcoded loop in JumbleQuery() with some rusage to get a more few metrics. This exagerates the query jumbling computing, but it's good enough to see a difference once you take an average of the time taken for each loop. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
