Horton

Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?

Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku@gmail.com>
To: John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com>
Cc: jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet@singh.im>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2024-01-08T07:24:40Z
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

Hi John,

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 10:44 AM John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 6, 2024 at 9:01 AM jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > latency average = 147.782 ms
> > select * from bench_cstring_hash_unaligned(100000);
> > latency average = 101.179 ms
> > select * from bench_cstring_hash_aligned(100000);
> > latency average = 101.219 ms
>
> Thanks for testing again! This looks closer to my results. It doesn't
> show improvement for the aligned case, but it's not worse, either.
>
> There is still some polishing to be done, mostly on comments/examples,
> but I think it's mostly there. I'll return to it by next week.
>
>

+ * Portions Copyright (c) 2018-2023, PostgreSQL Global Development Group

A kind reminder, it's already 2024 :)

I'm also curious why the 2018, is there any convention for that?

-- 
Regards
Junwang Zhao