Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> > This patch replaces a bunch of call sites of appendStringInfo() with
> > appendStringInfoString().
>
> I doubt this saves enough cycles to be worth doing, but if it floats
> your boat ...
>
> When I'm tempted to make a dubious micro-optimization, I always ask
> myself "is it likely that the sum of all machine time saved by this
> change will exceed the amount of person-time I am about to put into
> making it?" Given the number of places you're talking about touching,
> and the fact that I've never seen appendStringInfo placing high on a
> profile, I suspect this doesn't pass that test.
>
> I'm not objecting to your doing it, exactly, just suggesting that there
> are better things to spend your time on.
Of course, if it makes the code clearer, that is a win in itself.
--
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
