Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Faster StrNCpy

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Faster StrNCpy
Date: 2006-09-29 21:34:30
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc writes:
> If anybody is curious, here are my numbers for an AMD X2 3800+:

You did not show your C code, so no one else can reproduce the test on
other hardware.  However, it looks like your compiler has unrolled the
memcpy into straight-line 8-byte moves, which makes it pretty hard for
anything operating byte-wise to compete, and is a bit dubious for the
general case anyway (since it requires assuming that the size and
alignment are known at compile time).

This does make me wonder about whether we shouldn't try the
strlen+memcpy implementation I proposed earlier ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-09-29 21:41:35
Subject: Re: Per-database search_path
Previous:From: markDate: 2006-09-29 21:23:31
Subject: Re: Faster StrNCpy

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: markDate: 2006-09-29 21:59:17
Subject: Re: Faster StrNCpy
Previous:From: markDate: 2006-09-29 21:23:31
Subject: Re: Faster StrNCpy

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group