Re: Allowing printf("%m") only where it actually works

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Allowing printf("%m") only where it actually works
Date: 2018-09-26 22:45:47
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018-09-26 18:31:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > On 2018-09-26 17:41:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Well, if you're unhappy about snprintf.c's performance, you could review
> >>
> >> so I can push that. In my tests, that got us down to circa 10% penalty
> >> for float conversions.
> > Uh, I can do that, but the fact remains that your commit slowed down
> > COPY and other conversion intensive workloads by a *significant* amount.
> [ shrug... ] There are other cases that got faster (particularly after
> the above-mentioned patch). I do not wish to consider floating-point
> conversion speed as the sole figure of merit for this change. If we
> are to consider only the worst-case, we should be reverting JIT.

Oh, come on. One can be disabled with a GUC, has (although not good
enough) intelligence when it switches on, the other has ... none of
that. Obviously performance is always a balancing act, but you'd be
pretty pissed at anybody else regressing performance in a non-fringe
case, and then refused responsibility. And as I said, I'm willing to


Andres Freund

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2018-09-26 22:48:36 Re: Proposal for Signal Detection Refactoring
Previous Message Tom Lane 2018-09-26 22:31:07 Re: Allowing printf("%m") only where it actually works