| From: | Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | KAZAR Ayoub <ma_kazar(at)esi(dot)dz> |
| Cc: | Mark Wong <markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com>, Neil Conway <neil(dot)conway(at)gmail(dot)com>, Manni Wood <manni(dot)wood(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, 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: | 2026-02-03 10:59:52 |
| Message-ID: | CAN55FZ0EiPgUTJmGQXm9gP_VnogdQMkg2yhZSvwoSFJ1uVhFFg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Mon, 2 Feb 2026 at 23:45, KAZAR Ayoub <ma_kazar(at)esi(dot)dz> wrote:
>
>>
> Thanks for the benchmark, I'm a bit suspicious about this because I find it illogical or at least highly unexpected for a 1/3 specials workload to perform better than no specials !
> or csv no special regressing ! because it's expected to take the simd path for the whole processing, so it's supposed to perform better than master (at least ...).
I agree with you. I think it is highly unexpected that 1/3 specials
cases perform better than no special cases.
> I wonder what the results look like for COPY TO case on POWER. If you can try, that case is at least even more theoretically predictable.
Yes, that would be helpful.
--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nazir Bilal Yavuz | 2026-02-03 11:02:16 | Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-02-03 10:57:01 | Re: Non-deterministic buffer counts reported in execution with EXPLAIN ANALYZE BUFFERS |