We're talking about quite selects/updates/inserts etc. If we say we have
50TPS that makes one transaction every 20 milliseconds. So one more for
parsing makes up for 5% more computation power. I doubt inlining offers
much more speedup.

Michael
--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager    | topystem Systemhaus GmbH
meskes@topsystem.de                    | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
meskes@debian.org                      | 52146 Wuerselen
Go SF49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux!      | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44

> ----------
> From: 	Tom I Helbekkmo[SMTP:tih@Hamartun.Priv.NO]
> Sent: 	Freitag, 6. Februar 1998 17:55
> To: 	Michael Meskes
> Cc: 	Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL Hacker
> Subject: 	Re: [HACKERS] Bug?
> 
> Bruce Momjian said:
> 
> > The only fix for this would be to read all integers in as 64-bit
> > integers, then do the conversion, but that could be a performance
> > problem.
> 
> Michael Meskes answered:
> 
> > I agree. And performance is important. I think explicit type
> > conversion is what we should do. Or is it asked for too much if the
> > user has to add a ::float8 to the number?
> 
> Am I being dense here?  Can there really be a significant performance
> hit in the parsing of a query?  Let's say that it takes a millisecond
> extra to do the right thing with a number.  Does it matter?  How many
> queries per second can we expect to process anyway?
> 
> -tih
> -- 
> Popularity is the hallmark of mediocrity.  --Niles Crane, "Frasier"
> 

Sun, 8 Feb 1998 11:16:27 +0100
"Meskes, Michael" <meskes@topsystem.de>
RE: [HACKERS] Bug?