Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v10.0

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Pierre Ducroquet <p(dot)psql(at)pinaraf(dot)info>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v10.0
Date: 2018-02-07 21:34:02
Message-ID: 20180207213402.jby32vbe6wtkds4n@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2018-02-07 20:35:12 +0100, Pierre Ducroquet wrote:
> I also find it more readable and it looks cleaner, insane guys could be able
> to write their own JIT engines for PostgreSQL by patching a single
> file :)

Right - we could easily make the libname configurable if requested.

> Since it's now in its own .so file, does it still make as much sense using
> mostly the LLVM C API ?

Yes, I definitely want to continue that. For one the C API is a *lot*
more stable, for another postgres is C.

> I included a small addition to the gitignore file, I'm surprised you were not
> bothered by the various .bc files generated.

I use a VPATH build (i.e. source code is in a different directory than
the build products), so I do not really see that. But yes, it makes
sense to add ignores....

Thanks for looking,

Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Dolgov 2018-02-07 21:51:10 Re: [HACKERS] Bug in to_timestamp().
Previous Message legrand legrand 2018-02-07 21:13:29 Re: Add PGDLLIMPORT to enable_hashagg