On 8 April 2012 20:51, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Applied with some cosmetic adjustments.
Thanks. Having taken another look at the code, I wonder if we wouldn't have been better off just fastpathing out of pgss_store in the first call (in a pair of calls made by a backend as part an execution of some non-prepared query) iff there is already an entry in the hashtable - after all, we're now going to the trouble of acquiring the spinlock just to increment the usage for the entry by 0 (likewise, every other field), which is obviously superfluous. I apologise for not having spotted this before submitting my last patch. I have attached a patch with the modifications described. This is more than a micro-optimisation, since it will cut the number of spinlock acquisitions approximately in half for non-prepared queries. -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
pg_stat_statements_optimization_2012_04_08.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
