| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Doug Doole <ddoole(at)salesforce(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: Faster Expression Processing and Tuple Deforming (including JIT) |
| Date: | 2016-12-06 20:40:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20161206204006.bjmzp5fmtdss5bdu@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-12-06 14:35:43 -0600, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 12:27:51PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2016-12-06 14:19:21 -0600, Nico Williams wrote:
> > > > I concur with your feeling that hand-rolled JIT is right out. But
> > >
> > > Yeah, that way lies maintenance madness.
> >
> > I'm not quite that sure about that. I had a lot of fun doing some
> > hand-rolled x86 JITing. Not that is a ward against me being mad. But
> > more seriously: Manually doing a JIT gives you a lot faster compilation
> > times, which makes JIT applicable in a lot more situations.
>
> What I meant is that each time there are new ISA extensions, or
> differences in how relevant/significant different implementations of the
> same ISA implement certain instructions, and/or every time you want to
> add a new architecture... someone has to do a lot of very low-level
> work.
Yea, that's why I didn't pursue this path further. I *personally* think
it'd be perfectly fine to only support JITing on linux x86_64 and
aarch64 for now. And those I'd be willing to work on. But since I know
that's not project policy...
- Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-12-06 20:46:44 | Re: Compiler warnings |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-12-06 20:36:41 | Re: WIP: Faster Expression Processing and Tuple Deforming (including JIT) |