Re: Using 128-bit integers for sum, avg and statistics aggregates

From: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Using 128-bit integers for sum, avg and statistics aggregates
Date: 2015-03-18 23:14:46
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 03/18/2015 11:59 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Okay. Attached revision has a few tweaks that reflect the status of
> int128/uint128 as specialized types that are basically only useful for
> this optimization, or other similar optimizations on compilers that
> either are GCC, or aim to be compatible with it. I don't think
> Andreas' V9 reflected that sufficiently.
> Also, I now always use PolyNumAggState (the typedef), even for #define
> HAVE_INT128 code, which I think is a bit clearer. Note that I have
> generated a minimal diff, without the machine generated changes that
> are ordinarily included in the final commit when autoconf tests are
> added, mostly because I do not have the exact version of autoconf on
> my development machine required to do this without creating irrelevant


I have attached a patch where I have ran autoconf.

Andreas Karlsson

Attachment Content-Type Size
int128-agg-v11.patch text/x-patch 38.4 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2015-03-18 23:42:42 Re: Strange assertion using VACOPT_FREEZE in vacuum.c
Previous Message Andres Freund 2015-03-18 23:10:36 Re: parallel mode and parallel contexts