| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, Mark Cave-Ayland <m(dot)cave-ayland(at)webbased(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations |
| Date: | 2005-05-18 05:24:15 |
| Message-ID: | 200505180524.j4I5OF803426@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> > Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >> Do we know that? The results I showed put at least one fundamentally
> >> 32bit platform (the PowerBook I'm typing this on) at dead par for 32bit
> >> and 64bit CRCs.
>
> > Wait, par for 32-bit CRCs? Or for 64-bit CRCs calculated using 32-bit ints?
>
> Right, the latter. We haven't actually tried to measure the cost of
> plain 32bit CRCs... although I seem to recall that when we originally
> decided to use 64bit, someone put up some benchmarks purporting to
> show that there wasn't much difference.
OK, thanks. I didn't know that.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2005-05-18 05:43:07 | Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-18 05:12:26 | Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations |