Hi, On 2021-05-24 12:37:18 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: > Another option might be changes in the binary layout - 5% change is well > within the range that could be attributed to this, but it feels very > hand-wavy and more like an excuse than real analysis.
I don't think 5% is likely to be explained by binary layout unless you look for an explicitly adverse layout. > Hmmm, thanks for reminding us that patch. Why did we reject that approach in > favor of the current one? Don't know about others, but I think it's way too fragile. Greetings, Andres Freund
