| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Padding on 64-bit |
| Date: | 2007-05-30 20:02:49 |
| Message-ID: | 465DD869.5090704@hagander.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I think that's backwards. We *are* passing them by reference, we should
be considering passing them by value.
//Magnus
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Added to TODO:
>
> * Consider allowing 64-bit integers to be passed by reference on 64-bit
> platforms
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Neil Conway wrote:
>> On Tue, 2007-29-05 at 16:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> (I imagine someday we'll get around to allowing int8 to be pass-by-value
>>> on 64-bit platforms.)
>> This could really be a significant performance win: I'm planning to take
>> a look at doing it for 8.4.
>>
>> -Neil
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
>> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
>> match
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2007-05-30 20:03:10 | Re: Ye olde drop-the-database-you-just-left problem |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-05-30 20:02:47 | Re: Padding on 64-bit |