Re: Allowing printf("%m") only where it actually works

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-09-26 17:41:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, if you're unhappy about snprintf.c's performance, you could review
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/19/1763/
>> so I can push that.  In my tests, that got us down to circa 10% penalty
>> for float conversions.

> Uh, I can do that, but the fact remains that your commit slowed down
> COPY and other conversion intensive workloads by a *significant* amount.

[ shrug... ]  There are other cases that got faster (particularly after
the above-mentioned patch).  I do not wish to consider floating-point
conversion speed as the sole figure of merit for this change.  If we
are to consider only the worst-case, we should be reverting JIT.

            regards, tom lane