X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC35D9FA999 for ; Tue, 9 May 2006 20:09:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 70082-02 for ; Tue, 9 May 2006 20:09:21 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from projects.commandprompt.com (host-130.commandprompt.net [207.173.203.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E7609F9DCD for ; Tue, 9 May 2006 20:09:21 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.50] (or-67-76-146-141.sta.sprint-hsd.net [67.76.146.141]) (authenticated bits=0) by projects.commandprompt.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k49N9MUS000731; Tue, 9 May 2006 16:09:23 -0700 Message-ID: <4461211F.8020300@commandprompt.com> Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 16:09:19 -0700 From: "Joshua D. Drake" Organization: Command Prompt, Inc. User-Agent: Mail/News 1.5 (X11/20060309) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adam Palmblad CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Slow C Function References: <6B5AF6293A289F45826220B17ABE79370D5F4C@BORON.aers.local> In-Reply-To: <6B5AF6293A289F45826220B17ABE79370D5F4C@BORON.aers.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88, clamav-milter version 0.87 on projects.commandprompt.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (projects.commandprompt.com [192.168.2.159]); Tue, 09 May 2006 16:09:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200605/198 X-Sequence-Number: 18985 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/