From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] gperf anyone? |
Date: | 2000-01-19 00:36:00 |
Message-ID: | 200001190036.TAA07846@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
[Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> A while ago I played around with gperf (GNU perfect hash function
> generator), abusing the keyword lookup in parser/keyword.c as playground.
> Now before I delete this I was wondering if this would perhaps be of use
> to the general public. I don't know how huge the speed advantage of this
> is, I'm sure the parser/scanner speed is the least of our problems. But I
> thunk especially ecpg could benefit from this. Btw., gperf is used by GCC,
> so it's not a toy.
keywords are a fixed array, with a binary search to find a match. Could
gperf be faster? We also can not distribute GNU code.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-01-19 00:39:25 | Re: [HACKERS] gperf anyone? |
Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2000-01-19 00:35:58 | RE: [HACKERS] Index recreation in vacuum |