Re: Tidy fill hstv array (src/backend/access/heap/pruneheap.c)
От | Andrey M. Borodin |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Tidy fill hstv array (src/backend/access/heap/pruneheap.c) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2D923D65-5D29-475E-BF9C-990623BC4CF5@yandex-team.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Tidy fill hstv array (src/backend/access/heap/pruneheap.c) (John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Tidy fill hstv array (src/backend/access/heap/pruneheap.c)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On 14 Jan 2024, at 18:55, John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 9:36 PM Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Em ter., 9 de jan. de 2024 às 06:31, John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com> escreveu: > >>> This just moves an operation from one place to the other, while >>> obliterating the explanatory comment, so I don't see an advantage. >> >> Well, I think that is precisely the case for using memset. >> The way initialization is currently done is much slower and harmful to the branch. >> Of course, the gain should be small, but it is fully justified for switching to memset. > > We haven't seen any evidence or reasoning for that. Simple > rules-of-thumb are not enough. > Hi Ranier, I’ll mark CF entry [0] as “Returned with Feedback”. Feel free to reopen item in this CF or submit to the next, if you wantto continue working on this. I took a glance into the patch, and I would agree that setting field nonzero values with memset() is somewhat unusual. Pleaseprovide stronger evidence to do so. Thanks! Best regards, Andrey Borodin. [0] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/47/4734/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: