Hi,
In <CAD21AoAQkjU=o0nx4y0jtx0bnsrqa04g2abqruwjt88yeew...@mail.gmail.com>
"Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations" on
Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:33:13 -0700,
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've not followed the development of this patch - but I continue to be
>> concerned about the performance impact it has as-is and the amount of COPY
>> performance improvements it forecloses.
>>
>> This seems to add yet another layer of indirection to a lot of hot functions
>> like CopyGetData() etc.
>>
>
> The most refactoring works have been done by commit 7717f6300 and
> 2e4127b6d with a slight performance gain. At this stage, we're trying
> to introduce the registration API so that extensions can provide their
> callbacks to the core. Some functions required for I/O such as
> CopyGetData() and CopySendEndOfRow() would be exposed but I'm not
> going to add additional indirection function call layers.
I think Andres is talking about any indirection not only
indirection function call. In this case, "cstate->XXX" ->
"cstate->edata->XXX".
It's also mentioned in my e-mail. I'm not sure whether it
has performance impact but it's better that we benchmark to
confirm whether there is any performance impact or not with
the Copy{From,To}ExecutionData approach.
Thanks,
--
kou
