On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 08:06:58PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 13:05 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 05:27:38PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 15:15 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> > > > Its features include a better and faste
On Sun, Apr 06, 2008 at 12:02:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kenneth Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Okay, I will strip the VALGRIND paths. I did not see a real need for them
> > either.
>
> I have a patch ready to commit (as soon as I fix the regression test
> issues) that incorporates al
On 4/6/08, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So adopting the mixing changes would make it faster yet. What we need
> to be certain of is that this doesn't expose us to poorer hashing.
> We know that it is critical that all bits of the input affect all bits
> of the hash fairly uniformly --
Kenneth Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Okay, I will strip the VALGRIND paths. I did not see a real need for them
> either.
I have a patch ready to commit (as soon as I fix the regression test
issues) that incorporates all the word-wide-ness stuff. All you really
need to look at is the que
On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 03:40:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 13:05 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> >> The new hash function is roughly twice as fast as the old function in
> >> terms of straight CPU time. It uses the same design as t
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 13:05 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
>> The new hash function is roughly twice as fast as the old function in
>> terms of straight CPU time. It uses the same design as the current
>> hash but provides code paths for aligned and unalign
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:53:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kenneth Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Dear PostgreSQL Developers,
> > This patch is a "diff -c" against the hashfunc.c from postgresql-8.3beta1.
>
> It's pretty obvious that this patch hasn't even been tested on a
> big-endian
Kenneth Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dear PostgreSQL Developers,
> This patch is a "diff -c" against the hashfunc.c from postgresql-8.3beta1.
It's pretty obvious that this patch hasn't even been tested on a
big-endian machine:
> + #ifndef WORS_BIGENDIAN
However, why do we need two code
On Oct 28, 11:05 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenneth Marshall) wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 05:27:38PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 15:15 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> > > Its features include a better and faster hash function.
>
> > Looks very promising. Do you have any pe
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 08:06:58PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 13:05 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 05:27:38PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 15:15 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> > > > Its features include a better and faste
-
From: Simon Riggs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 04:48 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: CK.Tan
Cc: Luke Lonergan; Kenneth Marshall; pgsql-patches@postgresql.org; [EMAIL
PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] updated hash functions for pos
On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 13:19 -0700, CK Tan wrote:
> Hi, this query on TPCH 1G data gets about 5% improvement.
> select count (*) from (select l_orderkey, l_partkey, l_comment,
> count(l_tax) from lineitem group by 1, 2, 3) tmpt;
> On Oct 28, 2007, at 1:17 PM, Luke Lonergan wrote:
>
> > We just ap
7 04:11 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: Kenneth Marshall
Cc: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] updated hash functions for postgresql v1
On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 13:05 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 05:
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 04:11 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: Kenneth Marshall
Cc: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] updated hash functions for postgresql v1
On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 13:05 -0500, Kennet
On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 13:05 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 05:27:38PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 15:15 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> > > Its features include a better and faster hash function.
> >
> > Looks very promising. Do you have any perfo
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 05:27:38PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 15:15 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> > Its features include a better and faster hash function.
>
> Looks very promising. Do you have any performance test results to show
> it really is faster, when compiled into
On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 15:15 -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> Its features include a better and faster hash function.
Looks very promising. Do you have any performance test results to show
it really is faster, when compiled into Postgres? Better probably needs
some definition also; in what way are
Dear PostgreSQL Developers,
This patch is a "diff -c" against the hashfunc.c from postgresql-8.3beta1.
It implements the 2006 version of the hash function by Bob Jenkins. Its
features include a better and faster hash function. I have included the
versions supporting big-endian and little-endian ma
18 matches
Mail list logo
