| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Greatest Common Divisor |
| Date: | 2020-01-06 12:11:42 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaQXaOZtH-WcwMKbBOiiWtBvrw3giVN+XOvYieXG8QUXg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 4:21 PM Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
> In GCD implementations, for instance:
>
> if (arg1 == PG_INT32_MIN)
> if (arg2 == 0 || arg2 == PG_INT32_MIN)
>
> And possibly a "likely" on the while.
I don't think decoration the code with likely() and unlikely() all
over the place is a very good idea. Odds are good that we'll end up
with a bunch that are actually non-optimal, and nobody will ever
figure it out because it's hard to figure out. I have a hard time
believing that we're going to be much worse off if we just write the
code normally.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2020-01-06 12:17:43 | Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables |
| Previous Message | Rafia Sabih | 2020-01-06 11:25:32 | Re: adding partitioned tables to publications |