| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kurt Harriman <harriman(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: Remove gcc dependency in definition of inline functions |
| Date: | 2009-12-16 15:49:32 |
| Message-ID: | 4478.1260978572@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> So the plain-C89 compilers would be downgraded to "second-class"
> targets, not worth getting max performance out of them.
Hm? Failing to inline is already a performance hit, which is why
Kurt got interested in this in the first place.
I think you're way overthinking this. Where we started was just
a proposal to try to expand the set of inline-ing compilers beyond
"gcc only". I don't see why we need to do anything but that. The
code is fine as-is except for the control #ifdefs.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-12-16 15:51:27 | Re: PostgreSQL project policy compendium |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-12-16 15:48:44 | Re: [ADMIN] recovery is stuck when children are not processing SIGQUIT from previous crash |