Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?
Date: 2023-12-08 20:32:27
Message-ID: 40718ab2acf2af7a495a33f6f6f07b876b49635d.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2023-11-29 at 20:31 +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> Attached is a rough start with Andres's earlier ideas, to get
> something concrete out there.

The implementation of string hash in 0004 forgot to increment 'buf'.

I tested using the new hash function APIs for my search path cache, and
there's a significant speedup for cases not benefiting from a86c61c9ee.
It's enough that we almost don't need a86c61c9ee. So a definite +1 to
the new APIs.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2023-12-08 20:34:59 Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2023-12-08 19:45:25 Re: micro-optimizing json.c