| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: JIT compilation per plan node |
| Date: | 2024-02-20 05:38:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvqMWpwHjCP0H+xJS15LwnApYNY0hn6ya9EQF4RSv+oK6A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 18:31, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> FWIW, I seriously doubt that an extra walk of the plan tree is even
> measurable compared to the number of cycles JIT compilation will
> expend if it's called. So I don't buy your argument here.
> We would be better off to do this in a way that's clean and doesn't
> add overhead for non-JIT-enabled builds.
The extra walk of the tree would need to be done for every plan, not
just the ones where we do JIT. I'd rather find a way to not add this
extra plan tree walk, especially since the vast majority of cases on
an average instance won't be doing any JIT.
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2024-02-20 05:40:19 | Re: Switching XLog source from archive to streaming when primary available |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-02-20 05:33:44 | Re: Fix race condition in InvalidatePossiblyObsoleteSlot() |