| From: | "Greg Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Is it really such a good thing for newNode() to be a macro? |
| Date: | 2008-08-27 15:45:27 |
| Message-ID: | 4136ffa0808270845y74d9aeccv2be1bc0924c760ac@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> BTW, it would be nice to have a test case that shows it's worth messing with
> that.
At a guess the parser would be a good place to look. Perhaps a
benchmark of a parsing a very large query?
One thing I wonder is if you (or someone else) gets around to doing
the simple stack allocator for the parser if it will make
microoptimizations like this more visible.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michelle Caisse | 2008-08-27 23:24:52 | code coverage patch |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-08-27 15:36:02 | Re: Is it really such a good thing for newNode() to be a macro? |