| From: | Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | nospam-pg-abuse(at)bloodgate(dot)com, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, keisuke kuroda <keisuke(dot)kuroda(dot)3862(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11 |
| Date: | 2020-02-12 17:49:14 |
| Message-ID: | CAE2gYzzi5SC5PXgxoSxaNn3xgAjTK5Zy6QNdUjURWoVAsye_Fg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Wait, no. Didn't we get to the point that we figured out that the
> primary issue is the reversal of the order of what is checked is the
> primary problem, rather than the macro/inline piece?
Reversal of the order makes a small or no difference. The
macro/inline change causes the real slowdown at least on GCC.
> Nor do I see how it's going to be ok to just rename the function in a
> stable branch.
I'll post another version to keep them around.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2020-02-12 17:59:13 | Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11 |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-02-12 17:37:29 | Re: Exposure related to GUC value of ssl_passphrase_command |