Slow C Function
This is a discussion on Slow C Function within the Pgsql Performance forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> Hi, We've got a C function that we use here and we find that for every connection, the first ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
04-19-2008, 08:45 AM
| ||||
| ||||
 Slow C Function Hi, We've got a C function that we use here and we find that for every connection, the first run of the function is much slower than any subsequent runs. ( 50ms compared to 8ms) Besides using connection pooling, are there any options to improve performance? By the way, we are using pg version 8.1.3. -Adam ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq      |
|
04-19-2008, 08:45 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Slow C Function Adam Palmblad wrote: > > Hi, > > We've got a C function that we use here and we find that for every > connection, the first run of the function is much slower than any > subsequent runs. ( 50ms compared to 8ms) That is fairly standard because the data will be cached. > > Besides using connection pooling, are there any options to improve > performance? Not that I know of but then again I am not a C programer. > > By the way, we are using pg version 8.1.3. > > -Adam > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend |
|
04-19-2008, 08:46 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Slow C Function "Adam Palmblad" <adam@terapeak.com> writes: > We've got a C function that we use here and we find that for every > connection, the first run of the function is much slower than any > subsequent runs. ( 50ms compared to 8ms) Perhaps that represents the time needed to load the dynamic library into the backend? If so, the "preload_libraries" parameter might help you fix it. Or consider pooling connections. Or build a custom executable with the function linked in permanently. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings |
Linear Mode
