Re: inline newNode()

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: inline newNode()
Date: 2002-10-09 05:35:47
Message-ID: 200210090535.g995Zlc18935@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > ... I wish I saw another way.
>
> I liked Neil's proposal better.

I think Neil is going to test my patch. I think he will find it yields
identical performance to his patch without the bloat, and it will work
on all platforms. I don't think the MemSet() constant calls are that
big a performance win.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manfred Koizar 2002-10-09 08:00:03 Re: Large databases, performance
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-09 05:24:52 Re: inline newNode()

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Weiping He 2002-10-09 10:07:09 Chinese NLS files update
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-09 05:24:52 Re: inline newNode()