On 2014-10-08 13:52:14 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Meh. Even "SELECT 1" is going to be doing *far* more pallocs than that to > > get through raw parsing, parse analysis, planning, and execution startup. > > If you can find a few hundred pallocs we can avoid in trivial queries, > > it would get interesting; but I'll be astonished if saving 4 is measurable. > > I got nerd-sniped by this problem today, probably after staring at the > profiling data very similar to what led Andres to ask the question in > the first place.
I've loolked through this patch and I'm happy with it. One could argue that the current afterTriggers == NULL checks should be replaced with a Assert ensuring we're inside the xact. But I think you're right in removing them, and I don't think we actually need the asserts. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
