I wrote:
> I attach your original 0003 here (it still applies, with some line
> offsets). That's just so the cfbot doesn't get confused about what
> it's supposed to test now.
Pushed that part now, too.
BTW, the first test run I did on this (on x86_64) was actually several
percent *slower* than HEAD. I couldn't reproduce that after restarting
the postmaster; all later tests concurred that there was a speedup.
So I suppose that was just some phase-of-the-moon effect, perhaps caused
by an ASLR-dependent collision of bits of code in processor cache.
Still, that illustrates the difficulty of getting useful, reproducible
improvements when doing this kind of hacking. I tend to think that
most of the time we're better off leaving this to the compiler.
regards, tom lane