Change: move GET iterator time conversion out of SQL #2111
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mattmundell
changed the title
Conventional Commits Report
🚀 Conventional commits found. |
|
Replaced by /pull/2112 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Move the ISO time calculations in the "GET" iterators from SQL to C.
Why
Having the iterator do the time conversion is slower when there are many rows with a large offset, because Postgres still does the conversion for every row.
time o m m '<get_info type="nvt" filter="sort-reverse=created rows=10 first=80000"/>' > /tmp/infopatch 0.2, 0.2, 0.16
main 1.8, 2.2, 1.7
Leads to faster SecInfo pages when paging to the end, CPEs in particular.
References
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/queries-limit.html 7.6 LIMIT and OFFSET:
The rows skipped by an OFFSET clause still have to be computed inside the server; therefore a large OFFSET might be inefficient.