Re: unnecessary executor overheads around seqscans - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: unnecessary executor overheads around seqscans
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvpc7ab5pTrfHtJo1FBVruCvUBq22FvrJvNwc1nau80WBg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: unnecessary executor overheads around seqscans  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: unnecessary executor overheads around seqscans
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 at 04:36, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2026-01-24 19:36:08 +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> > I also noticed my compiler does not inline SeqNext(). Adding a
> > pg_attribute_always_inline results in it getting inlined and gives a
> > small speedup.
>
> Oh,m that's not good. I think we really had assumed that it would with the 18
> changes around this. It does here, but that's probably because I use -O3.

To reduce the variables here, I've pushed a fix for that after a quick
test showed a 3.9% speedup on a 1 million row table with a single int4
column filtering out all rows. I noticed that clang also didn't inline
with -O2. It does now.

David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mihail Nikalayeu
Date:
Subject: Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Next
From: Gyan Sreejith
Date:
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Adding Log File Capability to pg_createsubscriber