Re: inline newNode()

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Neil Conway writes:
>
> > MemSet(): ~9.6
> > memset(): ~19.5
> > __builtin_memset(): ~10.00
>
> I did my own tests with this code and the results vary wildly between
> platforms.  (I do not list __builtin_memset() because the results were
> invariably equal to memset().)
>
> Platform    buffer       memset()    MemSet()
>
> freebsd        32        5.3         4.9
> freebsd        256       23.3        24.2
> mingw        32        0.5         2.0
> mingw        256        6.6        10.5
> unixware    256       15.2        10.3
> unixware    1024       29.2        34.1
> cygwin        256        6.7        15.8
>
> "freebsd" is i386-unknown-freebsd4.7 with GCC 2.95.4.
> "mingw" is i686-pc-mingw32 with GCC 3.2.
> "unixware" is i586-sco-sysv5uw7.1.3 with vendor compiler version 4.1.
> "cygwin" is i686-pc-cygwin with GCC 2.95.3.
>
> GCC was run as 'gcc -O2 -Wall'.  (I also tried 'gcc -O3 -finline' but
> that gave only minimally better results.)  The SCO compiler was run as
> 'cc -O -Kinine -v'.
>
> Make of those results what you will, but the current cross-over point of
> 1024 seems very wrong.

No question 1024 looks wrong on a lot of platforms.  On Sparc, we were
seeing a crossover even higher, and on many like BSD/OS, the crossover
is much lower.  Without some platform-specific test, I don't know how we
are going to set this correctly.  Should we develop such a test?  Do we
have enough MemSet usage in the 256-4k range that people would see a
difference between different MEMSET_LOOP_LIMIT values?

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073