Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Right, palloc shouldn't. I was thinking of having another version of
> > palloc that _does_ clear out memory, and calling that from a newNode()
> > macro. We already know palloc is going to call MemoryContextAlloc, so
> > we could have a pallocC() that calls a new MemoryContextAllocC() that
> > would call the underlying memory allocation function, then do the loop
> > like MemSet to clear it.
>
> But if the MemSet is inside the called function then it cannot reduce
> the if-tests to a compile-time decision to invoke the word-zeroing loop.
> We want the MemSet to be expanded at the newNode call site, where the
> size of the allocated memory is a compile-time constant.
I can easily do the tests in the MemSet macro, but I can't do a loop in
a macro that has to return a value; I need while(). Though a loop in a
new fuction will not be as fast as a MemSet macro, I think it will be
better than what we have now with newNode only because newNode will be a
macro and not a function anymore, i.e. the MemSet will happen in the
function called by pallocC and not in newNode anymore, and there will be
zero code bloat. I wish I saw another way.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
