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 | http://candle.pha.pa.us [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
