Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2019-Jul-22, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>
>> ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
>>
>> > I noticed a lot of these are appending one StringInfo onto another;
>> > would it make sense to introduce a helper funciton
>> > appendStringInfoStringInfo(S
On 2019-Jul-22, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
>
> > I noticed a lot of these are appending one StringInfo onto another;
> > would it make sense to introduce a helper funciton
> > appendStringInfoStringInfo(StringInfo str, StringInfo str2) t
ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
> David Rowley writes:
>
>> On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 13:51, David Rowley
>> wrote:
>>> Instead of having 0004, how about the attached?
>>>
>>> Most of the calls won't improve much performance-wise since they're so
>>> cheap anyway, but there is
David Rowley writes:
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 13:51, David Rowley
> wrote:
>> Instead of having 0004, how about the attached?
>>
>> Most of the calls won't improve much performance-wise since they're so
>> cheap anyway, but there is xmlconcat(), I imagine that should see some
>> speedup.
>
> I'v
On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 13:51, David Rowley wrote:
> Instead of having 0004, how about the attached?
>
> Most of the calls won't improve much performance-wise since they're so
> cheap anyway, but there is xmlconcat(), I imagine that should see some
> speedup.
I've pushed this after having found a c
On Sun, 26 May 2019 at 04:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> David Rowley writes:
> > Here's a small patch series aimed to both clean up a few misuses of
> > string functions and also to optimise a few things along the way.
>
> > 0001: Converts various call that use appendPQExpBuffer() that really
> > shoul
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 08:54, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2019-May-26, David Rowley wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 26 May 2019 at 04:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > > Here the cost is code space rather than programmer-visible complexity,
> > > but I still doubt that it's worth it.
> >
> > I see on today's master
On 2019-May-26, David Rowley wrote:
> On Sun, 26 May 2019 at 04:50, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Here the cost is code space rather than programmer-visible complexity,
> > but I still doubt that it's worth it.
>
> I see on today's master the postgres binary did grow from 8633960
> bytes to 8642504 on my
On Sun, 26 May 2019 at 04:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> David Rowley writes:
> > 0003: Adds a new function named appendStringInfoStringInfo() which
> > appends one StringInfo onto another. Various places did this using
> > appendStringInfoString(), but that required a needless strlen() call.
>
> I can
David Rowley writes:
> Here's a small patch series aimed to both clean up a few misuses of
> string functions and also to optimise a few things along the way.
> 0001: Converts various call that use appendPQExpBuffer() that really
> should use appendPQExrBufferStr(). If there's no formatting then
Here's a small patch series aimed to both clean up a few misuses of
string functions and also to optimise a few things along the way.
0001: Converts various call that use appendPQExpBuffer() that really
should use appendPQExrBufferStr(). If there's no formatting then
using the former function is
11 matches
Mail list logo
