Re: pglz performance
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pglz performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 862cac5c-60f5-0fde-9451-8b294472c57d@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pglz performance (Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>) |
Ответы |
Re: pglz performance
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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 than8 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? -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: