Hi,
On 2021-05-24 12:37:18 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Another option might be changes in the binary layout - 5% change is well
> within the range that could be attributed to this, but it feels very
> hand-wavy and more like an excuse than real analysis.
I don't think 5% is likely to be explained by binary layout unless you
look for an explicitly adverse layout.
> Hmmm, thanks for reminding us that patch. Why did we reject that approach in
> favor of the current one?
Don't know about others, but I think it's way too fragile.
Greetings,
Andres Freund