From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Cc: Marc Colosimo <mcolosimo@mitre.org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: tweaking MemSet() performance - 7.4.5
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 13:01:42 -0400
Message-ID: <5185.1095526902@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <414C567C.3060503@colorfullife.com>
References: <8A6E7DA4-0654-11D9-800C-000A95A5D8B2@mitre.org>
<24165.1095450900@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<E60A72E0-08E7-11D9-B617-000A95A5D8B2@mitre.org>
<414C567C.3060503@colorfullife.com>
Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com> writes:
> That's the price you pay for weakly ordered memory access.
> Linux on ppc uses eieio, on ppc64 lwsync is used. Could you check if
> they are faster?
I recall looking at lwsync and being concerned about portability
problems --- older assemblers will fail to recognize it. I'd want
to see some hard evidence that changing sync to lwsync would be a
significant performance win before taking any portability risk here.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, manfred@colorfullife.com, mcolosimo@mitre.org
Subject: Re: tweaking MemSet() performance - 7.4.5
In-Reply-To: <5185.1095526902@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox