Horton

Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?

Anton A. Melnikov <a.melnikov@postgrespro.ru>

View thread
From: "Anton A. Melnikov" <a.melnikov@postgrespro.ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, Ants Aasma <ants.aasma@cybertec.at>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku@gmail.com>, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet@singh.im>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2025-01-16T10:54:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Silence warning in older versions of Valgrind

  2. Revert "Speed up tail processing when hashing aligned C strings, take two"

  3. Speed up tail processing when hashing aligned C strings, take two

  4. Teach fasthash_accum to use platform endianness for bytewise loads

  5. Add macro to disable address safety instrumentation

  6. Convert uses of hash_string_pointer to fasthash equivalent

  7. Speed up tail processing when hashing aligned C strings

  8. Add helper functions for dshash tables with string keys.

  9. Fix warnings in cpluspluscheck

  10. Further cosmetic review of hashfn_unstable.h

  11. Simplify initialization of incremental hash state

  12. Add optimized C string hashing

  13. Add inline incremental hash functions for in-memory use

  14. Make all Perl warnings fatal

Attachments

Hi!

On 16.01.2025 04:36, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Anton A. Melnikov" <a.melnikov@postgrespro.ru> writes:
>> Seems it is possible to exclude much less code from checking
>> under valgrind and get the same result by replacing the only
>> function call pg_rightmost_one_pos64() with a valgrind-safe
>> code. See the attached patch, please.
> 
> There is no place anywhere in our code base where we hide unsafe
> code from valgrind rather than fixing said code.  This does not
> seem like a place to start such an ugly practice.  Performance
> does not trump everything else.

Thanks for remark. Agreed.

> I'd be inclined to just remove the pg_rightmost_one_pos64 call
> in favor of the other coding you suggest.

Here is a patch like that.


With the best wishes,

-- 
Anton A. Melnikov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company