Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> Good point. I think we need to do some measurements to see if the
> parser-only stage is actually significant. I have a hunch that
> commercial databases have much heavier parsers than we do.
FWIW, gram.y does show up as significant in many of the profiles I take.
I speculate that this is not so much that it eats many CPU cycles, as that
the constant tables are so large as to incur lots of cache misses. scan.l
is not quite as big a deal for some reason, even though it's also large.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
