Re: inline newNode()

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: inline newNode()
Date: 2002-10-10 14:59:31
Message-ID: 200210101459.g9AExV505516@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Neil Conway wrote:
> BTW, regarding the newNode() stuff: so is it agreed that Bruce's patch
> is a performance win without too high of a code bloat / uglification
> penalty? If so, is it 7.3 or 7.4 material?

Not sure. It is a small patch but we normally don't do performance
fixes during beta unless they are major.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nick Fankhauser 2002-10-10 15:24:49 Out of memory error on huge resultset
Previous Message Greg Copeland 2002-10-10 14:39:02 Re: Bison 1.50 was released

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-10-10 17:28:47 Re: inline newNode()
Previous Message Gavin Sherry 2002-10-10 14:16:39 Re: inline newNode()