Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iQaHI-0006ot-4j for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 17:00:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iQaHG-00048k-TU for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 16:59:58 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iQaHG-00048Z-Ge for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 16:59:58 +0000 Received: from mail-wr1-x444.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::444]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1iQaHC-0000MJ-9t for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 16:59:57 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-x444.google.com with SMTP id n1so10259029wra.10 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 09:59:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=2ndquadrant-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=iu5bQgeUvzYYhGeQ+5kGqzzEt/wp0SsvSt+WEHha+uo=; b=do33r+1YVkJX7oMGc6vf4BL/J2xO5zXntTkY3nHdFH2nKVgk8Dc6jL3XUMsCu0nDpe BXIcLBALxPmXnuys6o1cBrnZhW44bDiy27NvuIWQfVJg4LuoGkLD6DtjdPX61ClD9QR2 rVBL9rfmdV6y+UdAivz6NKC2igD/FJsJfX4k5nfuYGO381eTqwJtW7HR+6Dz3RGkkfCq JBWPBiCCvv5QIB36KaXFcR34bJ63ckj3us3FVzPvk+wrullxGpmQFXiPt2im5MyMbQ3q MiD/rasHjUE7T/rPrCZEIWyf7PtP5T01Mp/4Syupnv0CYNX1T6A1fDdmQ/rhPkwBlqty vUww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=iu5bQgeUvzYYhGeQ+5kGqzzEt/wp0SsvSt+WEHha+uo=; b=O/YnwTcbKWlZMfhP7xvbTIdAHjdQl6rySkhN8YegLJgLE1EcVYcrkrOgrlZ3aBBT6G /m3CBZSWQmj86a2TUEIrEbL20Ae+fyN8KWwxXVrEoDtSebhUGRmCeEO2YpIctPz/8brs xmwCScLxovvsoBg9kc985BsUHU5qoPAFwdDzEmEtw+h4aOVx567LqU6hZK+H0C0C6r75 rEsJ61anqcGq/vJJ7BoJrn5AumovH8m9hv9wPymQZtbtsyK+hcgAptopvQwQ17it/8TI 8ZJiAxfxpxYGz/kqI1bqby0j7INdSyrU8XdoD1nHbC85nnYw0IK8jxFwiDhKWXfNSOwS nlkw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWgY69Ck/NIp6tHKVcOCIFcMiPQ1kkXcElz/En/meU5E6sG4iuk tJNNlzZgfab4K+m2VfxhijnQ7g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzvTgNfcB8P1WfTi0Dou6tm8UxCzmckuIu6rNTgkkMXrzX/YttvUcHkXI2YP7+pqbglzCfwNg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f048:: with SMTP id t8mr7922184wro.237.1572627592850; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 09:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-86-49-253-183.net.upcbroadband.cz. [86.49.253.183]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p10sm8203731wrx.2.2019.11.01.09.59.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 01 Nov 2019 09:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 17:59:50 +0100 From: Tomas Vondra To: Alvaro Herrera Cc: Peter Eisentraut , Andrey Borodin , Gasper Zejn , pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: pglz performance Message-ID: <20191101165950.b5azncggaqfan5fi@development> References: <3c2d92d0-e715-f9ed-e1a7-3c510ed65940@2ndquadrant.com> <20191101154828.GA15829@alvherre.pgsql> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20191101154828.GA15829@alvherre.pgsql> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 12:48:28PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >On 2019-Nov-01, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> On 2019-10-25 07:05, Andrey Borodin wrote: >> > > 21 окт. 2019 г., в 14:09, Andrey Borodin написал(а): >> > > >> > > With Silesian corpus pglz_decompress_hacked is actually decreasing performance on high-entropy data. >> > > Meanwhile pglz_decompress_hacked8 is still faster than usual pglz_decompress. >> > > In spite of this benchmarks, I think that pglz_decompress_hacked8 is safer option. >> > >> > Here's v3 which takes into account recent benchmarks with Silesian Corpus and have better comments. >> >> Your message from 21 October appears to say that this change makes the >> performance worse. So I don't know how to proceed with this. > >As I understand that report, in these results "less is better", so the >hacked8 variant shows better performance (33.8) than current (42.5). >The "hacked" variant shows worse performance (48.2) that the current >code. The "in spite" phrase seems to have been a mistake. > >I am surprised that there is so much variability in the performance >numbers, though, based on such small tweaks of the code. > I'd try running the benchmarks to verify the numbers, and maybe do some additional tests, but it's not clear to me which patches should I use. I think the last patches with 'hacked' and 'hacked8' in the name are a couple of months old, and the recent posts attach just a single patch. Andrey, can you post current versions of both patches? regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services