Re: Cleaning up and speeding up string functions
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Cleaning up and speeding up string functions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 31536.1558803042@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Cleaning up and speeding up string functions (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Cleaning up and speeding up string functions
Re: Cleaning up and speeding up string functions |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> 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 > using the former function is a waste of effort. > 0002: Similar to 0001 but replaces various appendStringInfo calls with > appendStringInfoString calls. Agreed on these; we've applied such transformations before. > 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't get excited about this one unless you can point to places where the savings is meaningful. Otherwise it's just adding mental burden. > 0004: inlines appendStringInfoString so that any callers that pass in > a string constant (most of them) can have the strlen() call optimised > out. Here the cost is code space rather than programmer-visible complexity, but I still doubt that it's worth it. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: