Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11
Date
Msg-id 8CB3B0A2-8039-4306-AB10-4BAFBFDB2779@anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On February 13, 2020 8:30:45 AM PST, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>Emre Hasegeli <emre@hasegeli.com> writes:
>>>> Cool. Emre, any chance you could write a patch along those lines?
>
>> How about the one attached?
>
>I see some minor things I don't like here, eg float_*flow_error()
>need some documentation as to why they exist.  But I'll review,
>fix those things up and then push.

Would be good to mark them noreturn too.

Wonder if it's useful to add the"cold" marker to pg. Not as part of this patch, but for functions like these.

Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Small docs bugfix: make it clear what can be used in UPDATE FROMand DELETE USING