Re: make BufferGetBlockNumber() a macro

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: make BufferGetBlockNumber() a macro
Date: 2002-04-02 01:50:27
Message-ID: 19609.1017712227@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org> writes:
> C's information hiding is weak enough that you need to rely on the
> client programmer to exercise good judgement anyway;

This is not a good argument for making the hiding even weaker. I still
object to this patch.

It would be interesting to try to understand *why* BufferGetBlockNumber
is showing up so high in your profile; AFAICS it is not called in any
paths where it'd be a bottleneck --- ie, there is other much more
expensive stuff in the same code paths. Do you have call counts by
caller? What exactly was the test case, anyway?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-04-02 03:10:03 Re: make BufferGetBlockNumber() a macro
Previous Message Neil Conway 2002-04-02 00:49:05 Re: make BufferGetBlockNumber() a macro