On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 04:47:55PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote: > > Andres didn't mention how big the performance benefit he saw with pgbench > > was, but I bet it was barely distinguishible from noise. But that's OK. In > > fact, there's no reason to believe this would make any difference to > > performance. The point is to make the code more readable, and it certainly > > achieves that. > > I think that when Bruce macro-ized this ten years ago or whenever it > was, he got a significant performance benefit from it; otherwise I > don't think he would have done it.
(You over-estimate me. ;-) ) What happened is that I was looking at call graph counts and fastgetattr() was called a bazillion times, so I inlined it, and saw a noticeably performance improvement, maybe 2% on an in-memory SELECT-only workload. Same with a few other macros I created in those early years. Frankly, my hacks last a lot longer than I expected. (Did someone say pg_upgrade. :-) ) -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
