On 2018-09-26 18:31:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.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 > >> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/19/1763/ > >> 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 help. Greetings, Andres Freund
