Yes, but since it is, why don't we inline it? Is there a possible
caveat?

Michael

--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Project-Manager    | topsystem Systemhaus GmbH
meskes@topsystem.de                    | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
meskes@debian.org                      | 52146 Wuerselen
Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire!             | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44
Use Debian GNU/Linux!                  | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Bruce Momjian [SMTP:maillist@candle.pha.pa.us]
> Sent:	Monday, March 23, 1998 4:08 PM
> To:	meskes@topsystem.de
> Cc:	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject:	Re: [HACKERS] Profile of current backend
> > Isn't this a good solution? A function only called by one other
> function has
> > its right to exist only for readability. And this optimization could
> be done
> > automatically.
> 
> Wouldn't be such a big deal if it was not call so many times.
> 
> -- 
> Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
> maillist@candle.pha.pa.us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania
> 19026
>   +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
>   +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)

Mon, 23 Mar 1998 16:02:57 +0100
"Meskes, Michael" <meskes@topsystem.de>
RE: [HACKERS] Profile of current backend
> 
> Yes, but since it is, why don't we inline it? Is there a possible
> caveat?

Inline it.  I just haven't had time or studied that part of the code.  I
had hoped the original researcher would do the honors, but I don't
remember who that was, or if it was you.



-- 
Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)

Mon, 23 Mar 1998 10:57:37 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Profile of current backend