Re: Use static inline functions for Float <-> Datum conversions
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Use static inline functions for Float <-> Datum conversions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18068.1472651054@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Use static inline functions for Float <-> Datum conversions (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes: > On 08/31/2016 02:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I wonder whether there is a compiler-dependent way of avoiding the union >> trick ... or maybe gcc is already smart enough that it doesn't matter? > It seems to compile into a single instruction, so it can't get any > better from a performance point of view. Yeah, confirmed here. On my not-real-new gcc (version 4.4.7, which ships with RHEL6), these test functions: Datum compare_int8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) {int64 x = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);int64 y = PG_GETARG_INT64(1); PG_RETURN_BOOL(x < y); } Datum compare_float8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) {double x = PG_GETARG_FLOAT8(0);double y = PG_GETARG_FLOAT8(1); PG_RETURN_BOOL(x < y); } compile into this (at -O2): compare_int8:.cfi_startprocmovq 40(%rdi), %raxcmpq %rax, 32(%rdi)setl %almovzbl %al, %eaxret.cfi_endproc compare_float8:.cfi_startprocmovsd 40(%rdi), %xmm0xorl %eax, %eaxucomisd 32(%rdi), %xmm0seta %alret.cfi_endproc (Not sure why the compiler does the widening of the comparison result differently, but it doesn't look like it matters.) Before this patch, that looked like: compare_float8:.cfi_startprocpushq %rbx.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16.cfi_offset 3, -16movq %rdi, %rbxsubq $16, %rsp.cfi_def_cfa_offset32movq 32(%rdi), %rdicall DatumGetFloat8movq 40(%rbx), %rdimovsd %xmm0, 8(%rsp)call DatumGetFloat8xorl %eax, %eaxucomisd 8(%rsp), %xmm0seta %aladdq $16, %rsp.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16popq %rbx.cfi_def_cfa_offset8ret.cfi_endproc Nice. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: