From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Missed opportunity for bsearch() in TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId()?
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 13:59:15 -0500
Message-ID: <Zo7aA2m35vGR56MN@nathan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <36977.1720623613@antos>
References: <36977.1720623613@antos>
On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 05:00:13PM +0200, Antonin Houska wrote:
> I don't quite understand why TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId() implements
> binary search in ParallelCurrentXids "from scratch" instead of using
> bsearch().
I believe there are a number of open-coded binary searches in the tree. My
concern with switching them to bsearch() would be the performance impact of
using a function pointer for the comparisons. Perhaps we could add a
couple of inlined binary search implementations for common types to replace
many of the open-coded ones.
--
nathan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: nathandbossart@gmail.com, ah@cybertec.at, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Missed opportunity for bsearch() in TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId()?
In-Reply-To: <Zo7aA2m35vGR56MN@nathan>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox