Re: [HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 18.11.2013 15:40, Marko Kreen wrote: On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 06:18:01PM +1300, David Rowley wrote: On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Marko Kreen wrote: I am bit suspicious of performance impact of this patch, but think that it's still worthwhile as it decreases code style where single string

Re: [HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-18 Thread Marko Kreen
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 06:18:01PM +1300, David Rowley wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Marko Kreen wrote: > > I am bit suspicious of performance impact of this patch, but think > > that it's still worthwhile as it decreases code style where single > > string argument is given to printf-s

Re: [HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-17 Thread David Rowley
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Marko Kreen wrote: > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 09:33:59PM +1300, David Rowley wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 3:18 AM, David Rowley > wrote: > > > I'm low on ideas on how to improve things much around here for now, but > > > for what it's worth, I did create a pa

Re: [HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-17 Thread Marko Kreen
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 09:33:59PM +1300, David Rowley wrote: > On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 3:18 AM, David Rowley wrote: > > I'm low on ideas on how to improve things much around here for now, but > > for what it's worth, I did create a patch which changes unnecessary calls > > to appendPQExpBuffer() i

Re: [HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-14 Thread David Rowley
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 3:18 AM, David Rowley wrote: > > I'm low on ideas on how to improve things much around here for now, but > for what it's worth, I did create a patch which changes unnecessary calls > to appendPQExpBuffer() into calls to appendPQExpBufferStr() similar to the > recent one for

Re: [HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-02 Thread David Rowley
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Rowley writes: > > Tom commited some changes to appendStringInfoVA a few weeks ago which > > allows it to return the required buffer size if the current buffer is not > > big enough. > > > On looking at appendPQExpBufferVA I'm thinking it w

Re: [HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Rowley writes: >> Tom commited some changes to appendStringInfoVA a few weeks ago which >> allows it to return the required buffer size if the current buffer is not >> big enough. > >> On looking at appendPQExpBufferVA I'm thinking it would

Re: [HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-01 Thread Tom Lane
David Rowley writes: > Tom commited some changes to appendStringInfoVA a few weeks ago which > allows it to return the required buffer size if the current buffer is not > big enough. > On looking at appendPQExpBufferVA I'm thinking it would be nice if it could > make use of the new pvsnprintf fun

[HACKERS] appendPQExpBufferVA vs appendStringInfoVA

2013-11-01 Thread David Rowley
Tom commited some changes to appendStringInfoVA a few weeks ago which allows it to return the required buffer size if the current buffer is not big enough. On looking at appendPQExpBufferVA I'm thinking it would be nice if it could make use of the new pvsnprintf function to bring the same potentia