Gregory Stark írta:
"Zoltan Boszormenyi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

- the int8inc(), int2_sum() and int4_sum() used pointers directly from the
 for performance, that code path is now commented out, the other code path
 is correct for the AggState and !AggState runs and correct every time and now
 because of the passbyval nature of int8, the !AggState version is not slower
 than using the pointer directly.

Does this mean count() and sum() are slower on a 32-bit machine?

If you mean "slower than on a 64-bit machine" then yes.
If you mean "slower than before", then no. I didn't express myself correctly. The original code path is not commented out, it is just conditionally compiled.

BTW I found the tsearch bug, it was a missing conversion of float4
in gistproc.c, it was an unfortunate detail that this didn't cause a segfault,
it woul have been easier to find. Now there are no failing regression tests.

Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH

Attachment: pg84-passedbyval-v2.patch.gz
Description: Unix tar archive

Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to