| From: | John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Антуан Виолин <violin(dot)antuan(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Sort functions with specialized comparators |
| Date: | 2025-01-07 04:57:45 |
| Message-ID: | CANWCAZZGgzrZM2GK6p91AYqzxZT8vRs--TzdFyHeJQC9101Xbg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 12:47 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 05:54:29PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> > Those functions from common/int.h are probably not good when inlined
> > (see comment there).
>
> +1. In fact, I think this comment was added because of the ST_MED3()
> function in sort_template.h [0]. IIRC clang handles this just fine, but
> gcc does not.
>
> [0] https://postgr.es/m/20240212230423.GA3519%40nathanxps13
Yeah. If it were just med3, it would probably be okay, but I remember
earlier experiments (also gcc) where branch-free comparators seemed to
not work well with our partitioning scheme.
--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrey M. Borodin | 2025-01-07 05:59:22 | Re: Sort functions with specialized comparators |
| Previous Message | Nisha Moond | 2025-01-07 04:55:50 | Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |