Re: strict aliasing (was: const correctness)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: "Florian Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Thomas Munro" <munro(at)ip9(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: strict aliasing (was: const correctness)
Date: 2011-11-14 20:19:01
Message-ID: 24666.1321301941@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> The results were interesting. While the small overlap between
> samples from the two builds at most levels means that this was
> somewhat unlikely to be just sampling noise, there could have been
> alignment issues that account for some of the differences. In
> short, the strict aliasing build always beat the other with 4
> clients or fewer (on this 4 core machine), but always lost with more
> than 4 clients.

That is *weird*.

> Also, is there something I should do to deal with the warnings
> before this would be considered a meaningful test?

Dunno ... where were the warnings exactly? Also, did you run the
regression tests (particularly the parallel version) against the
build?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-11-14 20:30:50 Re: strict aliasing (was: const correctness)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-11-14 20:07:54 Re: Concurrent CREATE TABLE/DROP SCHEMA leaves inconsistent leftovers