| From: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gasper Zejn <zejn(at)owca(dot)info>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pglz performance |
| Date: | 2019-09-04 12:45:19 |
| Message-ID: | E9738D6F-F7C9-4DCF-9DE3-AC572A971953@yandex-team.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> 4 сент. 2019 г., в 17:40, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> написал(а):
>
> On 2019-09-04 11:22, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>>> What about the two patches? Which one is better?
>> On our observations pglz_decompress_hacked.patch is best for most of tested platforms.
>> Difference is that pglz_decompress_hacked8.patch will not appply optimization if decompressed match is not greater than 8 bytes. This optimization was suggested by Tom, that's why we benchmarked it specifically.
>
> The patches attached to the message I was replying to are named
>
> 0001-Use-memcpy-in-pglz-decompression-for-long-matches.patch
> 0001-Use-memcpy-in-pglz-decompression.patch
>
> Are those the same ones?
Yes. Sorry for this confusion.
The only difference of 0001-Use-memcpy-in-pglz-decompression-for-long-matches.patch is that it fallbacks to byte-loop if len is <= 8.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Euler Taveira | 2019-09-04 13:11:14 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-09-04 12:40:07 | Re: pglz performance |