Re: Checksums, state of play

From: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Checksums, state of play
Date: 2012-03-08 21:01:40
Message-ID: CAA-aLv6DA39EwDTANTT1msCPDmwEgMAASTNEJV0hVNP-xkdEQg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8 March 2012 20:55, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 7 March 2012 20:56, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> Yep, good summary.  Giving ourselves a few months to think about it and
>> consider other failure cases will make this a great 9.3 addition.
>
> Recent Intel processors that support SSE 4.2, including those based on
> the core microarchitecture, can calculate a CRC-32C in hardware using
> a higher level instruction, similar to the AES related instructions
> that Intel chips have had for some time now. Perhaps we should
> consider using hardware acceleration where available.
>
> Some interesting details are available from here:
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/292984/

That's what Facebook did to speed up MySQL.
--
Thom

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-03-08 21:20:37 Re: [PATCH] Optimize IS DISTINCT FROM NULL => IS NOT NULL
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-03-08 20:59:03 Re: regress bug