On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 3:04 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> writes: > > I'm just looking at the changed code in commit > > 3147acd63e0135aff9a6c4b01d861251925d97d9 and I'm wondering if we should > > perhaps test the performance of this before assuming too much that it is > an > > improvement. I'm a bit concerned that now if there is not enough space in > > the buffer that we only now allocate what is needed, whereas before we > > would double the buffer's size. I guess this will save memory in many > > cases, but I'm a bit worried that we'll see quite a big drop in > performance > > when we next try to append to the string and have to reallocate space > again. > > Hm? enlargeStringInfo() still enforces the doubling behavior, AFAICS. > I don't see value in doubling the needed-space estimate before that. > > Oops, you're right. Sorry for the noise. > regards, tom lane >
