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

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
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: 2020-02-12 18:15:22
Message-ID: 6295.1581531322@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> I'd just rename the macro to the name of the inline function. No need to
> have a verbose change in all callsites just to update the name imo.

+1, that's what I had in mind too. That does suggest though that we
ought to make sure the macro has single-eval behavior, so that you
don't need to know it's a macro.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2020-02-12 18:23:37 assert pg_class.relnatts is consistent
Previous Message Andres Freund 2020-02-12 17:59:13 Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11