From: | Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc> |
---|---|
To: | James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)s-itsolutions(dot)at>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: UUID data format 4x-4x-4x-4x-4x-4x-4x-4x |
Date: | 2008-02-29 05:24:59 |
Message-ID: | 47C7972B.1020202@mark.mielke.cc |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
James Mansion wrote:
> Mark Mielke wrote:
>> I recall there being a measurable performance difference between the
>> most liberal parser, and the most optimized parser, back when I wrote
>> one for PostgreSQL. I don't know how good the one in use for
>> PostgreSQL 8.3 is. As to whether the cost is noticeable to people or
>> not - that depends on what they are doing. The problem is that a UUID
>> is pretty big, and parsing it liberally means a loop.
>>
> It just seems odd - I would have thought one would use re2c or ragel
> to generate something and the performance would essentially be O[n] on
> the input length in characters - using either a collection of allowed
> forms or an engine that normalises case and discards the '-'
> characters between any hex pairs.
Instruction level parallelism allows for multiple hex values to be
processed in parallel, whereas a loop relies on branch prediction and
speculative load and store? :-)
The liberal version is difficult to unroll. The strict version is easy
to unroll.
> So yes these would have a control loop. Is that so bad?
>
> Either way its hard to imagine how parsing a string of this length
> could create a measurable performance issue compared to what will
> happen with the value post parse.
I think so too.
Cheers,
mark
--
Mark Mielke <mark(at)mielke(dot)cc>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Dunstan | 2008-02-29 05:40:39 | Re: UUID data format 4x-4x-4x-4x-4x-4x-4x-4x |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-29 05:05:45 | Re: Batch update of indexes on data loading |