Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Patch applied. Thanks.
> > I added a comment about the unused bits in the header file.
>
> Has anyone bothered to measure the overhead added by having to mask to
> fetch or store the natts value? This is not a zero-cost improvement.
I assumed Heikki had tested it, but now see no mention of a test in the
posting:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-01/msg00052.php
Tom, how should this be tested? I assume some loop of the same query
over and over again.
--
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
