Re: inline newNode()

From: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: inline newNode()
Date: 2002-10-10 14:16:39
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0210110008510.15169-100000@linuxworld.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On 10 Oct 2002, Neil Conway wrote:

> Well, I'd assume any C library / compiler of half-decent quality on
> any platform would provide assembly optimized versions of common
> stdlib functions like memset().
>
> While playing around with memset() on my machine (P4 running Linux,
> glibc 2.2.5, GCC 3.2.1pre3), I found the following interesting
> result. I used this simple benchmark (the same one I posted for the
> earlier MemSet() thread on -hackers):
>

[snip]

> Compiled with '-DBUFFER_SIZE=256 -O2', I get the following results in
> seconds:
>
> MemSet(): ~9.6
> memset(): ~19.5
> __builtin_memset(): ~10.00

I ran the same code. I do not understand the results you go. Here are
mine, on an AMD Duron with GCC 3.2 and glibc-2.2.5. Results are:

MemSet(): 14.758 sec
memset(): 11.597 sec
__buildin_memset(): 9.000 sec

Who else wants to test?

Gavin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-10-10 14:18:16 Re: Bison 1.50 was released
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-10 14:05:42 Re: GRANT on functions/languages

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-10 14:59:31 Re: inline newNode()
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2002-10-10 09:20:54 EXPLAIN ANALYZE bug/patch