Ronan Dunklau <ronan.dunk...@aiven.io> writes:
>> Yeah, I think the same rules around scope apply as
>> tuplesort_gettupleslot() with copy==false. We could do it by adding a
>> copy flag to the existing function, but I'd rather not add the
>> branching to that function. It's probably just better to duplicate it
>> and adjust.
> For the record, I tried to see if gcc would optimize the function by
> generating two different versions when copy is true or false, thus getting
> rid
> of the branching while still having only one function to deal with.
TBH, I think this is completely ridiculous over-optimization.
There's exactly zero evidence that a second copy of the function
would improve performance, or do anything but contribute to code
bloat (which does have a distributed performance cost).
regards, tom lane
