David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 at 16:29, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>> Indeed, that's the same thing as 110d817 to make all those calls
>> cheaper. No objections from me to do those changes now rather than
>> later on HEAD.
> I think it would be good to fix at least the instances that are new
> code in PG14 before we branch for PG15. They all seem low enough risk
> and worth keeping the new-to-PG14 code as close to the same as
> possible between major versions.
+1 for fixing this sort of thing in new code before we branch.
I'm less interested in changing code that already exists in back
branches. I think the risk of causing headaches for back-patches
may outweigh any benefit of such micro-optimizations.
regards, tom lane
