Luke Lonergan wrote: > Bruce, > > On 12/27/05 10:20 AM, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> wrote: > > > OK, original patch applied to HEAD and smaller version to 8.1.X, and > > regression test added, now attached. > > Great, good catch. > > Have you tested performance, before and after? > > The only good way to test performance is using a fast enough I/O subsystem > that you are CPU-bound, which means >60MB/s of write speed. > > I'd be happy to get you an account on one.
Advertising
I don't need to test performance because it is the same code, just with macros and the two functions merged. I do have an optimization for that loop but I saw no improvement so I didn't apply it. It was basically to advance the pointer in a tight look just checking for \r, \n, and \\, but it seems the larger loop isn't much slower than a tight one. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (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 6: explain analyze is your friend
