| From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Karel Zak" <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "List pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Inline MemoryContextSwitchTo? |
| Date: | 2005-02-07 08:28:09 |
| Message-ID: | KGEFLMPJFBNNLNOOOPLGAEHMCIAA.simon@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>Karel Zak wrote
> On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 18:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Can anyone think of a reason we aren't inlining
> MemoryContextSwitchTo()
> > in GCC builds, similarly to the way list_head() et al are handled?
> >
> > It wouldn't be a huge gain, but I consistently see
> MemoryContextSwitchTo
> > eating a percent or three of most profiles.
>
> Sounds good.
>
> I think we can inlining all MemoryContext functions which check memory
> context header and call context->metods->...() only. An example
> MemoryContextAlloc() that is very often called from code too.
Yes, thats good.
But why MemoryContextSwitchTo ? That seems to come out much lower than
MemoryContextAllocZeroAligned or MemoryContextAlloc on the profiles I've
seen.
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian Hars | 2005-02-07 12:06:13 | BUG #1467: fe_connect doesn't handle EINTR right |
| Previous Message | Karel Zak | 2005-02-07 08:13:09 | Re: Inline MemoryContextSwitchTo? |