| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Xiang Gao <Xiang(dot)Gao(at)arm(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CRC32C Parallel Computation Optimization on ARM |
| Date: | 2023-10-24 21:18:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20231024211806.GA919080@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 04:09:54PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I'm able to reproduce the speedup with the provided benchmark on an Apple
> M1 Pro (which appears to have the required instructions). There was almost
> no change for the 512-byte case, but there was a ~60% speedup for the
> 4096-byte case.
>
> However, I couldn't produce any noticeable speedup with Heikki's pg_waldump
> benchmark [0]. I haven't had a chance to dig further, unfortunately.
> Assuming I'm not doing something wrong, I don't think such a result should
> necessarily disqualify this optimization, though.
Actually, since the pg_waldump benchmark likely only involves very small
WAL records, it would make sense that there isn't much difference.
*facepalm*
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2023-10-24 21:20:56 | Re: Add new for_each macros for iterating over a List that do not require ListCell pointer |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2023-10-24 21:09:54 | Re: CRC32C Parallel Computation Optimization on ARM |