Re: Simplifying our Trap/Assert infrastructure

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Simplifying our Trap/Assert infrastructure
Date: 2022-10-10 19:20:08
Message-ID: 140401.1665429608@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 05:08:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Something I thought about but forgot to mention in the initial email:
>> is it worth sprinkling these macros with "unlikely()"?

> I don't see why not.

I experimented with that, and found something that surprised me:
there's a noticeable code-bloat effect. With the patch as given,

$ size src/backend/postgres
text data bss dec hex filename
9001199 86280 204496 9291975 8dc8c7 src/backend/postgres

but with unlikely(),

$ size src/backend/postgres
text data bss dec hex filename
9035423 86280 204496 9326199 8e4e77 src/backend/postgres

I don't quite understand why that's happening, but it seems to
show that this requires some investigation of its own. So for
now I just pushed the patch as-is.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-10-10 19:35:16 Re: Reducing the chunk header sizes on all memory context types
Previous Message Melanie Plageman 2022-10-10 18:48:49 Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)