Re: Boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped()
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-Wz=eWfq6qTtWd5j1QtyLL2AWYtF9_bJa61xE5wWHnZOsjQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped() (Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:23 AM Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > I wonder if you would also see a speed-up with a bsearch() replacement > > > that is inlineable, so it can inline the comparator (instead of > > > calling it through a function pointer). I wonder if something more > > > like (lblk << 32 | loff) - (rblk << 32 | roff) would go faster than > > > the branchy comparator. > > > > Erm, off course that expression won't work... should be << 16, but > > even then it would only work with a bsearch that uses int64_t > > comparators, so I take that part back. > > Yeah, it seems to worth benchmarking the speed-up with an inlining. > I'll do some performance tests with/without inlining on top of > checking boundary values. It sounds like Thomas was talking about something like itemptr_encode() + itemptr_decode(). In case you didn't know, we actually do something like this for the TID tuplesort used for CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: