Re: Microoptimization of Bitmapset usage in postgres_fdw

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Microoptimization of Bitmapset usage in postgres_fdw
Date: 2018-07-01 06:17:42
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 07:23:19PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> On 17 Jun 2018, at 14:47, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>> - if (bms_num_members(clauses_attnums) < 2)
>> + if (bms_membership(clauses_attnums) != BMS_MULTIPLE)
>> For this one, the comment above directly mentions that at least two
>> attnums need to be present, so it seems to me that the current coding is
>> easier to understand and intentional... So I would be incline to not
>> change it.
> I don’t have any strong feelings either way, and will leave that call to the
> committer who picks this up. I agree that the current coding is easy to
> understand but I don’t see this being much harder.

I have looked at that again, and pushed the portion for postgres_fdw as
the intention is clear, while leaving out the part from the statistics
per the comment close by. Thanks!

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mai Peng 2018-07-01 09:02:24 Re: ERROR: cannot start subtransactions during a parallel operation
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2018-07-01 04:28:21 Re: Explain buffers wrong counter with parallel plans