On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> I also tried changing the BufferIsValid() tests in >> visibilitymap_test() to use BufferIsInvalid() instead, with the sense >> of the tests reversed (see attached vismap-test-invalid.patch). Since >> BufferIsInvalid() just checks for InvalidBuffer instead of also doing >> the sanity checks, it's significantly cheaper. This also reduced the >> time to about 330 ms, so seems clearly worth doing. > > Hmm. I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to get rid of the range > checks in BufferIsValid, or better convert them into Asserts. It seems > less than intuitive that BufferIsValid and BufferIsInvalid aren't simple > inverses.
Seems reasonable. It would break if anyone is using an out-of-range buffer number in lieu of InvalidBuffer, but I doubt that anyone is. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
