Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD

From: KAZAR Ayoub <ma_kazar(at)esi(dot)dz>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Manni Wood <manni(dot)wood(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Neil Conway <neil(dot)conway(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD
Date: 2026-03-06 23:31:19
Message-ID: CA+K2RunT=1P7_E4jrZMogDiPunNCOGw9P_UHLaJRJk=5_odKmA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Sat, Mar 7, 2026 at 12:13 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 03:25:46PM -0600, Manni Wood wrote:
> > Well, golly! Look at these numbers. Old master with no lz4, your v11
> patch
> > with no lz4, and then your v11 patch with lz4 compiled in.
>
> I'm appreciative of all the benchmarking that you and others are doing, but
> wouldn't we be more interested in the difference between "old master with
> lz4" and "v11 with lz4"? Else, we have multiple variables in play.
>
Yes I agree because the lz4 effect doesn't prove anything for the SIMD
patch itself right ? So basically a comparison for the SIMD effect should
be "master with/out lz4 vs patched with/out lz4, respectively and nothing
more!", is this correct ?

Regards,
Ayoub

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melanie Plageman 2026-03-06 23:33:10 Re: eliminate xl_heap_visible to reduce WAL (and eventually set VM on-access)
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2026-03-06 23:19:53 Re: Add starelid, attnum to pg_stats and leverage this in pg_dump