From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
Cc: | Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: tsearch in core patch, for inclusion |
Date: | 2007-02-21 14:54:13 |
Message-ID: | 13303.1172069653@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Florian G. Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
> Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
>> I didn't find hard facts about runtime complexity of LALR,
>> though (pointers are very welcome).
> a) and b) should be O(1). Processing one token pushes at most one state
> onto the stack, so overall no more than N stats can be popped off again,
> making the whole algorithm O(N) with N being the number of tokens of the
> input stream.
Yeah. I was concerned about the costs involved in trying to pack the
state tables, but it appears that that cost is all paid when the grammar
is compiled --- looking into gram.c, it appears the inner loop contains
just simple array lookups. Still, bloating of the state tables is
something we ought to pay attention to, because there's a distributed
cost once they no longer fit in a processor's L1 cache. On my machine
"size gram.o" is over 360K already ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-02-21 14:55:52 | Re: Column storage positions |
Previous Message | Brian Hurt | 2007-02-21 14:49:29 | Re: tsearch in core patch, for inclusion |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-02-21 14:59:17 | Re: tsearch in core patch, for inclusion |
Previous Message | Brian Hurt | 2007-02-21 14:49:29 | Re: tsearch in core patch, for inclusion |