X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FE46D9FF8 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 08:24:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 99502-02 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 11:24:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.nildram.co.uk (smtp.nildram.co.uk [195.112.4.54]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52D0FD9FF7 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 08:24:36 -0300 (ADT) Received: from 192.168.0.3 (unknown [84.12.188.233]) by smtp.nildram.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48DC724D4B1; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:24:37 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort? From: Simon Riggs To: Martijn van Oosterhout Cc: Tom Lane , Ron Peacetree , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <20051004100441.GC17589@svana.org> References: <18329659.1128188552696.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <20051001215602.GG13830@svana.org> <29837.1128223567@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20051002123240.GA30492@svana.org> <20051002193835.GJ30492@svana.org> <1128376292.8603.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20051004100441.GC17589@svana.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: 2nd Quadrant Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 12:24:54 +0100 Message-Id: <1128425094.8603.296.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.054 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.004, FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.05] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200510/167 X-Sequence-Number: 74026 On Tue, 2005-10-04 at 12:04 +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 10:51:32PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > > > Basically, I recommend adding "-Winline -finline-limit-1500" to the > > > default build while we discuss other options. > > > > I add -Winline but get no warnings. Why would I use -finline-limit-1500? > > > > I'm interested, but uncertain as to what difference this makes. Surely > > using -O3 works fine? How did you determine the 1500 figure? Can you give some more info to surround that recommendation to allow everybody to evaluate it? Best Regards, Simon Riggs