Re: Minor codegen silliness in ExecInterpExpr()

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2017-09-28 16:21:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We could save a pointless register spill
>> and reload if there were a temporary variable in there,

> Makes sense. Do you want to make it so, or shall I?

I just finished testing a patch, as attached. On my machine (again,
not latest gcc: 4.4.7 on RHEL6 x86_64), it reduces the code size of
execExprInterp.o by a fraction of a percent, and it seems to offer
a slight benefit in "pgbench -S" performance although I'd not put
much stock in that being reproducible.

> I'd personally be
> somewhat tempted to keep the branches in sync here...

I was tempted that way too, but it doesn't apply cleanly to v10,
because of Peter's recent cleanup of function pointer invocation
style. I don't think it's really worth worrying about.

regards, tom lane