Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com>, nospam-pg-abuse(at)bloodgate(dot)com, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, keisuke kuroda <keisuke(dot)kuroda(dot)3862(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11
Date: 2020-02-13 18:47:10
Message-ID: 20200213184710.jjrkxavfmu2nktf4@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2020-02-13 13:40:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> ... and pushed. One other change I made beyond those suggested
> was to push the zero-divide ereport's out-of-line as well.

Thanks!

> I did not do anything about adding unlikely() calls around the
> unrelated isinf tests in float.c. That seemed to me to be a separate
> matter, and I'm not quite convinced it'd be a win anyway.

I was mostly going for consistency...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message legrand legrand 2020-02-13 19:57:11 Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-02-13 18:40:43 Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11