Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: RFC: list API / memory allocations

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RFC: list API / memory allocations
Date: 2011-11-19 17:33:19
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Now, if you could do something that *doesn't* restrict what operations
> could be applied to the lists, that would be good.

If the API is followed, I believe my previous patch works for
everything, but it wasn't variable about the size of the new list.
Perhaps we could combine the two approaches, though there would be more
overhead from dealing with a variable bitmap for what's currently used.

> I've wished for a long while that we could allocate the list header and
> the first list cell in a single palloc cycle.  

You've mentioned that before and, to be honest, I could have sworn that
we're doing that already..



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-11-19 17:35:17
Subject: Re: EXPLAIN (plan off, rewrite off) for benchmarking
Previous:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2011-11-19 17:31:09
Subject: Re: RFC: list API / memory allocations

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group