| From: | Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | a_ogawa <a_ogawa(at)hi-ho(dot)ne(dot)jp>, List pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: AllocSetReset improvement |
| Date: | 2005-05-16 07:03:37 |
| Message-ID: | 1116227017.29081.4.camel@petra |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 11:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I have another idea though: in the case you are looking at, I think
> that the context in question never gets any allocations at all, which
> means its blocks list stays null. We could move the MemSet inside the
> "if (blocks)" test --- if there are no blocks allocated to the context,
> it surely hasn't got any chunks either, so the MemSet is unnecessary.
Good point. There's same MemSet in AllocSetDelete() too.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | a_ogawa | 2005-05-16 12:58:35 | Re: AllocSetReset improvement |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-05-16 05:52:39 | Re: Minor comments typo fix in src/port |