On Sunday 30 May 2010 18:29:31 Greg Stark wrote: > On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 4:54 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > I read through that thread and couldn't find much discussion of > > alternative CRC implementations --- we spent all our time on arguing > > about whether we needed 64-bit CRC or not. > > Alright, how about this thread? > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.general/71741 > > This actually sounds like precisely the same algorithm. Perhaps this > implementation is much better but your tests on the old one showed a > big difference between smaller and larger data sequences. I haven't yet had a chance to read the intel paper (I am in the train and latency is 30s+ and the original link is dead), but I got the sf.net implementation.
Seeing it I think I might know the reason why it wasn't as much faster as promised - it introduces ordering constraints by avoiding shifts by using term2. Not sure though. Anybody got the implementation by Gurjeet? I couldn't find it online (within the constraints of the connection). Greetings, Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
