Re: Faster StrNCpy

From: "Sergey E(dot) Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Faster StrNCpy
Date: 2006-10-02 20:18:34
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0610030011410.12197@lnfm1.sai.msu.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Sergey E. Koposov" <math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru> writes:
>> Just the test on IA64 (Itanium2, 1.6Ghz, 8Gb memory). The results seem to
>> be quite different:
>
> What libc are you using exactly? Can you try it with the unrolled
> strlcpy I posted?

glibc 2.3.5 , gcc 3.4.4

my results were obtained already with your unrolled version (but when I
first ran it with the 'default' strlcpy the results were the same).

>
> In glibc-2.4.90, there seem to be out-of-line assembly code
> implementations of strncpy for: sparc64 sparc32 s390x s390 alpha ia64
> and an inlined assembler version for i386. So the x86_64 case is
> nearly the only popular architecture that doesn't seem to have
> a hand-hacked implementation ... which throws some doubt on Mark's and
> my results as possibly not being very representative.

Regards,
Sergey

*******************************************************************
Sergey E. Koposov
Max Planck Institute for Astronomy/Sternberg Astronomical Institute
Tel: +49-6221-528-349
Web: http://lnfm1.sai.msu.ru/~math
E-mail: math(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)ru

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2006-10-02 21:00:16 Re: [HACKERS] Incrementally Updated Backup
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-10-02 20:09:55 Ready for beta2?

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2006-10-02 21:00:16 Re: [HACKERS] Incrementally Updated Backup
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-10-02 20:06:08 Re: Faster StrNCpy