On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> All in all I would say that the performance is worth the loss in >> detection capability as we are not talking about using the checksum to >> prove correctness. > > Is it actually a loss compared to our 16bit flavor of crc32 we now use? > I didn't think so far from the properties you described?
I would have to run the testsuite I made to see now much but I would presume so. The algorithm relies on multiplication for bit diffusion and multiply has lousy diffusion on low order bits, exactly no diffusion for the lowest bit. And for 16bit values low order bits is quite a large fraction of the total hash. If we allow for operations that are not in SSE2 then there are a few things that we could do to make the hash quality better without affecting performance. pmulld instruction (SSE4.1) would allow for 32bit values in the intermediate state. And pshufb (SSE3) would allow us to swap high and low bytes introducing additional mixing. On Intel Sandy Bridge, if I understand the microarchitecture correctly, either change would be basically free, but not both because pshufb and paddw use execution ports 0 and 5, while pmulld needs port 0 and pmullw needs port 1. Currently the main loop takes 1 cycle per 16byte chunk, any changes introducing conflicts there would cut the performance in half. Regards, Ants Aasma -- Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH Gröhrmühlgasse 26 A-2700 Wiener Neustadt Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers