can
easily just fall back to glibc sprintf in those cases. I was only
thinking of implementing only the most commonly used formats anyway,
initially at least.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>> sprintf(dest, "%d", arg1); -> a new function that does the same thing,
>> but without the overhead of parsing the format string. Like itoa on some
>> platforms. We could inline
Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 October 2007 20:48, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> but it does beat glibc (5.20s) by a wide margin.
>> However, preparsing the format string in gcc still beats the linux
>> version hands down (0.82s).
>
> You preparse "%d
Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Monday 08 October 2007 16:08, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>>> In linux kernel, decimal conversion in vsprintf() is optimized
>>> with custom conversion code. x3 faster, and no, it's not written in
>>> as
Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Monday 08 October 2007 13:50, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> While profiling a test case of exporting data from PostgreSQL, I noticed
>> that a lot of CPU time was spent in sprintf, formatting timestamps like
>> "2007-10-01 12:34". I cou
been proposed before? I couldn't find anything relevant in the
archives.
One small problem I see is that if you replace one of the output
handlers for something like %s with register_printf_function, the
simplified code won't honor that replacement. Actually, we have that
prob
