From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Custom code int(32|64) => text conversions out of performance reasons |
Date: | 2010-11-20 19:41:03 |
Message-ID: | 201011202041.04118.andres@anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday 20 November 2010 18:34:04 Tom Lane wrote:
> BTW, while we're thinking about marginal improvements: instead of
> constructing the string backwards and then reversing it in-place,
> what about building it working backwards from the end of the buffer
> and then memmove'ing it down to the start of the buffer?
>
> I haven't tested this but it seems likely to be roughly a wash
> speed-wise. The reason I find the idea attractive is that it will
> immediately expose any caller that is providing a buffer shorter
> than the required length, whereas now such callers will appear to
> work fine if they're only tested on small values.
Tried that, the cost was measurable although not big (~3-5%)...
Greetings,
Andres
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2010-11-20 19:47:20 | Re: [PATCH] Custom code int(32|64) => text conversions out of performance reasons |
Previous Message | Vaibhav Kaushal | 2010-11-20 19:08:42 | Re: Fwd: What do these terms mean in the SOURCE CODE? |