On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 02:17:26PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ldh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > So you mean that on average, the 4x overhead of exceptions is around what you'd expect? > > Doesn't surprise me any, no. Exception recovery has to clean up after > a wide variety of possible errors, with only minimal assumptions about > what the system state had been. So it's expensive. More to the point, > the overhead's been broadly the same for quite some time. > > > As for results in general, yes, your numbers look pretty uniform across versions. On my end, comparing V11.2 vs V13.4 shows a much different picture! > > I'm baffled why that should be so. I do not think any of the extensions > you mention add any exception-recovery overhead, especially not in > sessions that haven't used them. Laurent, did you install binaries for v13.4 or compile it ? What about these ? SHOW shared_preload_libraries; SHOW session_preload_libraries; SHOW local_preload_libraries; Would you try to reproduce the issue with a fresh database: CREATE DATABASE udftest; ... Or a fresh instance created with initdb. As I recall, you're running postgres under a windows VM - I'm not sure if that's relevant. -- Justin
