| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Delaying/avoiding BTreeTupleGetNAtts() call within _bt_compare() |
| Date: | 2020-02-19 20:55:38 |
| Message-ID: | 9472.1582145738@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
> It also inlines (in the second patch) by marking the _bt_compare
> definition as inline, while not changing anything in nbtree.h. I
> believe that this is portable C99 -- let's see what CF Tester thinks
> of it.
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. But why do we need
this, and what exactly are you hoping the compiler will do with it?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-02-19 21:06:33 | Re: pg_regress cleans up tablespace twice. |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-02-19 20:48:36 | Re: Increase psql's password buffer size |