Re: pglz performance

> 4 сент. 2019 г., в 17:40, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> написал(а):
>
> 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?

Yes. Sorry for this confusion.

The only difference of 0001-Use-memcpy-in-pglz-decompression-for-long-matches.patch is that it fallbacks to byte-loop
iflen is <= 8. 

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.