Re: pgsql: Add documentation for the JIT feature.

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add documentation for the JIT feature.
Date: 2018-03-29 19:00:36
Message-ID: 20180329190036.GP24540@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Greetings,

* Andres Freund (andres(at)anarazel(dot)de) wrote:
> On 2018-03-29 13:26:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > > I'd go a little further and drop "JIT" from user-facing documentation
> > > altogether. Instead refer to the feature as "compilation of expressions"
> > > or some such. JIT is just jargon. Plus, the timing of the compilation is
> > > actually the least important property for our purpose.
> >
> > I agree that talking about JIT compilation (or just-in-time
> > compilation) would be better than talking just about JIT, but refusing
> > to mention JIT seems counter-productive to me. There are a lot of
> > people who know what just-in-time compilation is and will not realize
> > that "compilation of expressions" refers to any such technology. If
> > you don't know what it is, you can Google it. Just typing "jit" into
> > Google produces a stupid urban dictionary hit and then this:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-in-time_compilation -- and that
> > contains useful information that you'll never find if you search for
> > "compilation of expressions".
> >
> > Also, in a way, you could argue that v10 already did "compilation of
> > expressions". It didn't compile them to machine language, true, but
> > it translated them into a form which is faster to execute, and which
> > is at least arguably a form of bytecode. It's not going to be clear,
> > even to an expert, that "compilation of expressions" means something
> > other than that, but if you say JIT, then all of a sudden people know
> > what we're talking about.
> >
> > I agree that JIT is jargon, but it's pretty commonly-used jargon.
>
> Precisely this. I'm very strongly against just saying "expression
> compilation", it's just too imprecise. As Robert mentions it could refer
> to what we do in v10, it could refer to ahead of time compilation of PL
> functions, and it doesn't include compiling tuple deforming. Nor will
> it describe compiling sorting, copy or whatnot.
>
> I'm very open however to replacing JITing with JIT compiling and smilar
> substitutions.

What we've done elsewhere when there's been similar jargon is to say
something along the lines of:

"compiling of routines (also known as Just-In-Time or JIT compilation)"

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2018-03-29 19:19:02 pgsql: C comments: "a" <--> "an" corrections
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-03-29 18:43:51 Re: pgsql: Add documentation for the JIT feature.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2018-03-29 19:06:49 Re: Incorrect use of "an" and "a" in code comments and docs
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-03-29 18:43:51 Re: pgsql: Add documentation for the JIT feature.