From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Optimizing TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId() |
Date: | 2019-12-20 17:57:55 |
Message-ID: | CANP8+jKWO0aphhSEnbVWEJyUpZjYVC4=You+u6pjP-UxW5jcmg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 17:46, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 13:07, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> With regard to this point, I second Tomas's comments.
>
> > I also agree with Tomas' comments. I am explaining *why* it will be an
> > improvement, expanding on my earlier notes.
> > This function is called extremely frequently in query processing and is
> > fairly efficient. I'm pointing out cases where making it even quicker
> makes
> > sense.
>
> I think the point is that you haven't demonstrated that this particular
> patch makes it quicker.
>
Not yet, but I was trying to agree what an appropriate test would be before
running it.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
<http://www.2ndquadrant.com/>
PostgreSQL Solutions for the Enterprise
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2019-12-20 18:07:58 | Re: Protocol problem with GSSAPI encryption? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-12-20 17:46:34 | Re: Optimizing TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId() |