Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: inline newNode()

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>,PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: inline newNode()
Date: 2002-10-10 14:59:31
Message-ID: 200210101459.g9AExV505516@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Neil Conway wrote:
> BTW, regarding the newNode() stuff: so is it agreed that Bruce's patch
> is a performance win without too high of a code bloat / uglification
> penalty? If so, is it 7.3 or 7.4 material?

Not sure.  It is a small patch but we normally don't do performance
fixes during beta unless they are major.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Nick FankhauserDate: 2002-10-10 15:24:49
Subject: Out of memory error on huge resultset
Previous:From: Greg CopelandDate: 2002-10-10 14:39:02
Subject: Re: Bison 1.50 was released

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2002-10-10 17:28:47
Subject: Re: inline newNode()
Previous:From: Gavin SherryDate: 2002-10-10 14:16:39
Subject: Re: inline newNode()

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group