|From:||Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>|
|To:||Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Gasper Zejn <zejn(at)owca(dot)info>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org|
|Subject:||Re: pglz performance|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
Oleg, Peter, thanks for looking into this!
I hope to benchmark decompression on Silesian corpus soon.
PFA v2 with better comments.
> 27 сент. 2019 г., в 14:41, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> написал(а):
> After reviewing this thread and more testing, I think
> 0001-Use-memcpy-in-pglz-decompression.patch appears to be a solid win
> and we should move ahead with it.
> I don't, however, fully understand the code changes, and I think this
> could use more and better comments. In particular, I wonder about
> off *= 2;
I've changed this to
off += off;
> This is new logic that isn't explained anywhere.
> This whole function is commented a bit strangely. It begins with
> "Otherwise", but there is nothing before it. And what does "from OUTPUT
> to OUTPUT" mean? There is no "output" variable. We should make this
> match the code better.
I've added small example to illustrate what is going on.
Open source RDBMS development team leader
|Next Message||Amit Kapila||2019-09-28 12:03:10||Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions|
|Previous Message||Antonin Houska||2019-09-28 08:15:56||Re: Attempt to consolidate reading of XLOG page|