Re: optimize lookups in snapshot [sub]xip arrays

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, John Naylor <jcnaylor(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: optimize lookups in snapshot [sub]xip arrays
Date: 2022-08-09 20:00:37
Message-ID: 20220809200037.GA1490626@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 01:21:41PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> I decided I wasn't quite comfortable changing snapshot handling
> without further guarantees. To this end, 0002 in the attached v11 is
> an addendum that adds assert checking (also pgindent and some
> comment-smithing). As I suspected, make check-world passes even with
> purposefully screwed-up coding. 0003 uses pg_lfind32 in syscache.c and
> I verified that sticking in the wrong answer will lead to a crash in
> assert-enabled builds in short order. I'd kind of like to throw this
> (or something else suitable) at the build farm first for that reason.
> It's simpler than the qsort/qunique/binary search that was there
> before, so that's nice, but I've not tried to test performance.

Your adjustments in 0002 seem reasonable to me. I think it makes sense to
ensure there is test coverage for pg_lfind32(), but I don't know if that
syscache code is the right choice. For non-USE_SSE2 builds, it might make
these lookups more expensive. I'll look around to see if there are any
other suitable candidates.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2022-08-09 20:15:28 Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size
Previous Message Jonathan S. Katz 2022-08-09 19:59:44 Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size