From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Delaying/avoiding BTreeTupleGetNAtts() call within _bt_compare() |
Date: | 2020-02-19 22:45:04 |
Message-ID: | 29232.1582152304@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2020-02-19 15:55:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Boy, I'd be pretty darn hesitant to go there, even with our new
>> expectation of C99 compilers. What we found out when we last experimented
>> with non-static inlines was that the semantics were not very portable nor
>> desirable. I've forgotten the details unfortunately.
> I think most of those problems were about putting extern inlines into
> headers however - not about putting an inline onto an extern within one
> translation unit only. Given that potential fallout should be within a
> single file, and can fairly easily be fixed with adding wrappers etc, I
> think it's a fairly low risk experiment to see what the buildfarm
> thinks.
The buildfarm would only tell you if it compiles, not whether the
performance results are what you hoped for.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2020-02-19 22:57:12 | Re: Delaying/avoiding BTreeTupleGetNAtts() call within _bt_compare() |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2020-02-19 22:38:24 | Re: Delaying/avoiding BTreeTupleGetNAtts() call within _bt_compare() |