Em seg., 8 de mai. de 2023 às 14:26, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> escreveu:
> On 2023-May-08, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > On 23.04.23 08:42, Richard Guo wrote: > > > Thanks for the suggestion. I've split the patch into two as attached. > > > 0001 is just a minor simplification by replacing > lfirst(list_head(list)) > > > with linitial(list). 0002 introduces new functions to reduce the > > > movement of list elements in several places so as to gain performance > > > improvement and benefit future callers. > > > > These look sensible to me. If you could show some numbers that support > the > > claim that there is a performance advantage, it would be even more > > convincing. > > 0001 looks fine. > > The problem I see is that each of these new functions has a single > caller, and the only one that looks like it could have a performance > advantage is list_copy_move_nth_to_head() (which is the weirdest of the > lot). I'm inclined not to have any of these single-use functions unless > a performance case can be made for them. > I think you missed list_nth_xid, It makes perfect sense to exist. regards, Ranier Vilela
