Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
Date: 2022-06-27 15:26:49
Message-ID: 20220627152649.3vt6w5qivanilb3m@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2022-06-27 18:12:13 +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> Another thought: for non-x86 platforms, the SIMD nodes degenerate to
> "simple loop", and looping over up to 32 elements is not great
> (although possibly okay). We could do binary search, but that has bad
> branch prediction.

I'd be quite quite surprised if binary search were cheaper. Particularly on
less fancy platforms.

- Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jacob Champion 2022-06-27 15:33:19 [Commitfest 2022-07] Begins This Friday
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2022-06-27 15:23:22 Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum