| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add bump memory context type and use it for tuplesorts |
| Date: | 2024-04-05 14:24:31 |
| Message-ID: | 1274556.1712327071@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 22:43, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> The only objection I can think of is that perhaps this would slow
>> things down a tad by requiring more complicated shifting/masking.
>> I wonder if we could redo the performance checks that were done
>> on the way to accepting the current design.
> I didn't do very extensive testing, but the light performance tests
> that I did with the palloc performance benchmark patch & script shared
> above indicate didn't measure an observable negative effect.
OK. I did not read the patch very closely, but at least in principle
I have no further objections. David, are you planning to take point
on getting this in?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2024-04-05 14:35:42 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2024-04-05 14:15:45 | Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser |