| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Manni Wood <manni(dot)wood(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, KAZAR Ayoub <ma_kazar(at)esi(dot)dz>, Neil Conway <neil(dot)conway(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: | 2026-02-24 17:48:17 |
| Message-ID: | aZ3kYQnF9_u6sUQp@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 04:57:21PM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> I will investigate this. However, please note that the current master
> includes the inlining commit (dc592a4155), which makes the COPY FROM
> faster. In my case,
>
> 1: current master without dc592a4155: 14400ms
> 2: current master: 13960ms (%3 improvement against #1)
> 3: current master + SIMD: 15123ms (%5 regression against #1 and %8
> regression against #2)
>
> Is it possible for you to do a similar test? I mean dropping
> dc592a4155 from the current master and re-running the benchmark, that
> would be helpful.
IMHO as long as the difference from v18 looks reasonable, commit-by-commit
regressions and improvements that even out in the end are okay. That's
perhaps a bit of mental gymnastics (e.g., what if we had committed the
inlining patch for v18?), but I believe that's how we've dealt with similar
problems in the past. But maybe there are ways to avoid even these
in-development regressions, too...
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2026-02-24 18:13:02 | Re: pgsql: libpq: Grease the protocol by default |
| Previous Message | Álvaro Herrera | 2026-02-24 17:41:40 | Re: Cleaning up array_ref() and array_set() |