Re: Why JIT speed improvement is so modest?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why JIT speed improvement is so modest?
Date: 2019-12-06 15:53:44
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYewAaYNQFALyTCTaBuGW0uay0+wHkEGaQAwaPK1PkZ1Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 2:08 AM Konstantin Knizhnik
<k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> calls float4_accum for each row of T, the same query in VOPS will call
> vops_float4_avg_accumulate for each tile which contains 64 elements.
> So vops_float4_avg_accumulate is called 64 times less than float4_accum.
> And inside it contains straightforward loop:
>
> for (i = 0; i < TILE_SIZE; i++) {
> sum += opd->payload[i];
> }
>
> which can be optimized by compiler (loop unrolling, use of SIMD
> instructions,...).

Part of the reason why the compiler can optimize that so well is
probably related to the fact that it includes no overflow checks.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2019-12-06 16:23:25 Re: error context for vacuum to include block number
Previous Message Robert Haas 2019-12-06 15:48:53 Re: [Proposal] Level4 Warnings show many shadow vars