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 6075AD9EB0 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 07:05:14 -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 41821-09 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:05:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr2.postgresql.org (svr2.postgresql.org [65.19.161.25]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18CD8D9BFD for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 07:05:11 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svana.org (svana.org [203.20.62.76]) by svr2.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7681BF0C9E for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 11:00:24 +0100 (BST) Received: from kleptog by svana.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1EMjfM-00050x-00; Tue, 04 Oct 2005 20:04:56 +1000 Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:04:56 +0200 From: Martijn van Oosterhout To: Simon Riggs Cc: Tom Lane , Ron Peacetree , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort? Message-ID: <20051004100441.GC17589@svana.org> Reply-To: Martijn van Oosterhout 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oJ71EGRlYNjSvfq7" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1128376292.8603.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-PGP-Key-ID: Length=1024; ID=0x0DC67BE6 X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: 295F A899 A81A 156D B522 48A7 6394 F08A 0DC6 7BE6 X-PGP-Key-URL: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.008 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.008] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200510/161 X-Sequence-Number: 74020 --oJ71EGRlYNjSvfq7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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. >=20 > I add -Winline but get no warnings. Why would I use -finline-limit-1500? >=20 > I'm interested, but uncertain as to what difference this makes. Surely > using -O3 works fine? Different versions of gcc have different ideas of when a function can be inlined. From my reading of the documentation, this decision is independant of optimisation level. Maybe your gcc version has a limit higher than 1500 by default. --=20 Martijn van Oosterhout http://svana.org/kleptog/ > Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a > tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone > else to do the other 95% so you can sue them. --oJ71EGRlYNjSvfq7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQFDQlO4IB7bNG8LQkwRAi4sAJ9vNeAbCjfuFfVxd49c6pwLDy4eSACeL023 HDxAYHDb4vP8PFsJtwGrgXQ= =ybxt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oJ71EGRlYNjSvfq7--