Re: Optimize Arm64 crc32c implementation in Postgresql

From: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Yuqi Gu <Yuqi(dot)Gu(at)arm(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers\(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Optimize Arm64 crc32c implementation in Postgresql
Date: 2018-05-03 03:20:57
Message-ID: 87r2mt8m1r.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:

+ uint64 data = 42;

Isn't there a hidden assumption about endianness there?

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-05-03 03:25:43 Re: Optimize Arm64 crc32c implementation in Postgresql
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2018-05-03 02:49:42 Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled?