| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> | 
| Cc: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> | 
| Subject: | Re: Using POPCNT and other advanced bit manipulation instructions | 
| Date: | 2019-02-13 22:17:19 | 
| Message-ID: | 20190213221719.GA15976@alvherre.pgsql | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On 2019-Feb-13, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> It definitely is ... plans have changed from using IndexOnly scans to
> Seqscans, which is likely fallout from the visibilitymap_count() change.
I think the problem here is that "unsigned long" is 32 bits in this
machine:
  checking whether long int is 64 bits... no
and we have defined pg_popcount64() like this:
static int
pg_popcount64_sse42(uint64 word)
{
	return __builtin_popcountl(word);
}
so it's counting bits in the lower half of the uint64.
If that's correct, then I think we need something like this patch.  But
it makes me wonder whether we need a configure test for
__builtin_popcountll() and friends.  I wonder if there's any compiler
that implements __builtin_popcountl() but not __builtin_popcountll() ...
and if not, then the test for __builtin_popcountl() should be removed,
and have everything rely on the one for __builtin_popcount().
-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size | 
|---|---|---|
| uint64-is-longlong.patch | text/x-diff | 1.2 KB | 
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-02-13 22:33:22 | Re: Using POPCNT and other advanced bit manipulation instructions | 
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-02-13 21:51:47 | Re: subscriptionCheck failures on nightjar |