public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Bryan Green <[email protected]>
To: Ranier Vilela <[email protected]>
Cc: Pg Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Avoid multiple calls to memcpy (src/backend/access/index/genam.c)
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2026 11:06:28 -0600
Message-ID: <CAF+pBj9M8rCoS-EEBwLiA6hdxm_UNjxMXG9Vc4RU8xifqnQB-g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF+pBj-K2bgNQRc9ih01WFmAWUaQtVbS37jLtYdYh5LOwOkF6A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEudQApbWon+3Eb9x4WW_D-JkSt2mvfx99dXu9VZ4AeCuTh=fw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAEudQApEfvhNT1fEPURzVcQH7G0A1ukh_ugoCGaErV6_dbndCQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAF+pBj_RS2KErTqQ6ORXjhVzmukG7Ve0wHU1Kq56xjJfFKwVqA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAEudQAptRymgvmd5hQb2mk-Ft89XcSo_xvC74kv4JBA9v=D4Sg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAF+pBj-K2bgNQRc9ih01WFmAWUaQtVbS37jLtYdYh5LOwOkF6A@mail.gmail.com>
I meant to add that the micro-benchmark went through each loop 100,000,000
iterations for each run...
for 20 runs to come up with those numbers.
--bg
On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 11:02 AM Bryan Green <[email protected]> wrote:
> I performed a micro-benchmark on my dual epyc (zen 2) server and version 1
> wins for small values of n.
>
> 20 runs:
>
> n version min median mean max stddev noise%
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> n=1 version1 2.440 2.440 2.450 2.550 0.024 4.5%
> n=1 version2 4.260 4.280 4.277 4.290 0.007 0.7%
>
> n=2 version1 2.740 2.750 2.757 2.880 0.029 5.1%
> n=2 version2 3.970 3.980 3.980 4.020 0.010 1.3%
>
> n=4 version1 4.580 4.595 4.649 4.910 0.094 7.2%
> n=4 version2 5.780 5.815 5.809 5.820 0.013 0.7%
>
> But, micro-benchmarks always make me nervous, so I looked at the actual
> instruction cost for my
> platform given the version 1 and version 2 code.
>
> If we count cpu cycles using the AMD Zen 2 instruction latency/throughput
> tables: version 1 (loop body)
> has a critical path of ~5-6 cycles per iteration. version 2 (loop body)
> has ~3-4 cycles per iteration.
>
> The problem for version 2 is that the call to memcpy is ~24-30 cycles due
> to the stub + function call + return
> and branch predictor pressure on first call. This probably results in
> ~2.5 ns per iteration cost for version 2.
>
> So, no I wouldn't call it an optimization. But, it will be interesting to
> hear other opinions on this.
>
> --bg
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 10:25 AM Ranier Vilela <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Em seg., 9 de mar. de 2026 às 11:47, Bryan Green <[email protected]>
>> escreveu:
>>
>>> I created an example that is a little bit closer to the actual code and
>>> changed the compiler from C++ to C.
>>>
>>> It is interesting the optimization that the compiler has chosen for
>>> version 1 versus version 2. One calls
>>> memcpy and one doesn't. There is a good chance the inlining of memcpy
>>> as SSE+scalar per iteration
>>> will be faster for syscache scans-- which I believe are usually small
>>> (1-4 keys?).
>>>
>> I doubt the inline version is better.
>> Clang is supported too and the code generated is much better with memcpy
>> one call outside of the loop.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Probably the only reason to do this patch would be if N is normally
>>> large or if this is considered an
>>> improvement in code clarity without a detrimental impact on small N
>>> syscache scans.
>>> I realize you only said "possible small optimization". It might be
>>> worthwhile to benchmark the code for
>>> different values of n to determine if there is a tipping point either
>>> way?
>>>
>> In your opinion, shouldn't this be considered an optimization, even a
>> small one?
>>
>> best regards,
>> Ranier Vilela
>>
>
view thread (17+ messages) latest in thread
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Avoid multiple calls to memcpy (src/backend/access/index/genam.c)
In-Reply-To: <CAF+pBj9M8rCoS-EEBwLiA6hdxm_UNjxMXG9Vc4RU8xifqnQB-g@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox