Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This patch replaces a bunch of call sites of appendStringInfo() with
> > appendStringInfoString().
> I doubt this saves enough cycles to be worth doing, but if it floats
> your boat ...
> When I'm tempted to make a dubious micro-optimization, I always ask
> myself "is it likely that the sum of all machine time saved by this
> change will exceed the amount of person-time I am about to put into
> making it?"  Given the number of places you're talking about touching,
> and the fact that I've never seen appendStringInfo placing high on a
> profile, I suspect this doesn't pass that test.
> I'm not objecting to your doing it, exactly, just suggesting that there
> are better things to spend your time on.

Of course, if it makes the code clearer, that is a win in itself.

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to