Re: [HACKERS] "may be unused" warnings for gcc - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [HACKERS] "may be unused" warnings for gcc
Date
Msg-id 20190927212348.3x5njykipgmnyru4@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] "may be unused" warnings for gcc  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2017-02-22 09:26:10 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2/21/17 22:17, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I've not run comparisons this year, but late last year I was seeing > 5%
> > < 10% benefits - that seems plenty enough to care.
> 
> You mean the 5-minute benchmarks on my laptop are not representative? ;-)
> 
> Here is a patch that I had lying around that clears the compiler
> warnings under -O3 for me.  It seems that they are a subset of what you
> are seeing.  Plausibly, as compilers are doing more analysis in larger
> scopes, we can expect to see more of these.

I pushed the subset that I still see locally with gcc -O3.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Steele
Date:
Subject: Re: recovery starting when backup_label exists, but notrecovery.signal
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set