| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: JIT compilation per plan node |
| Date: | 2024-02-20 05:31:55 |
| Message-ID: | 115617.1708407115@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 05:26, Tomas Vondra
> <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be simpler to just build the plan as we do now, and then
>> have an expression_tree_walker that walks the complete plan top-down,
>> inspects the nodes, enables JIT where appropriate and so on? That can
>> have arbitrary context, no problem with that.
> Why walk the entire plan tree again to do something we could do when
> building it in the first place?
FWIW, I seriously doubt that an extra walk of the plan tree is even
measurable compared to the number of cycles JIT compilation will
expend if it's called. So I don't buy your argument here.
We would be better off to do this in a way that's clean and doesn't
add overhead for non-JIT-enabled builds.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-02-20 05:33:44 | Re: Fix race condition in InvalidatePossiblyObsoleteSlot() |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2024-02-20 05:14:57 | Re: JIT compilation per plan node |