public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
To: Pierre Ducroquet <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <[email protected]>
Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <[email protected]>
Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
Cc: Adrien Nayrat <[email protected]>
Cc: Christoph Berg <[email protected]>
Cc: Euler Taveira <[email protected]>
Cc: Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Andreas Karlsson <[email protected]>
Cc: Anthonin Bonnefoy <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Banck <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Change default of jit to off
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 17:56:39 -0400
Message-ID: <vhiu76rnwynmtmm3jbkettfelj5l2jtnbkwm7szpiyjbyrmd44@3gdapm3mnu3m> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <gPNlX1QTDtJW2Cyi3fA2OGFvoIybkehUYKCHCe2r3Ujm_0y9V1T13CPI2MA6RyPhLi8zNwNczq1DNrbh1l47eVn6tOwz-qzG2yXw_XtptTQ=@pinaraf.info>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAKAnmmKZ_Yg2CEt9Wa-QZWZ7UePfWB9qnk=qDiXZcqNS5MdrGQ@mail.gmail.com>
<zavalseit5sbjf5gx352ioobtlqtycrs5yczynwzckacdwqh23@mjuvibp2z44t>
<CAGECzQQdO5OGnxe7bpN1usp+ku+tLBW=SwgLbrULVcFAjH5_yA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<gPNlX1QTDtJW2Cyi3fA2OGFvoIybkehUYKCHCe2r3Ujm_0y9V1T13CPI2MA6RyPhLi8zNwNczq1DNrbh1l47eVn6tOwz-qzG2yXw_XtptTQ=@pinaraf.info>
Hi,
On 2026-03-23 06:33:33 +0000, Pierre Ducroquet wrote:
> Le vendredi 20 mars 2026 à 5:25 PM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> a écrit :
>
> > Tomas Vondra <[email protected]> writes:
> > > ISTM there's a clear consensus to get this committed for PG19, so
> > > barring objections I'll take care of that in the next couple days.
> > > Unless someone else wants to ...
> >
> > +1
> >
> > > Another option would be to leave that for mid-beta, which is where we
> > > tweaked the io_method GUCs last year. But we did that to get some
> > > testing for 'worker' (in case we revert to 'sync'), and we don't need
> > > that for jit.
> >
> > Doesn't seem like something to change mid-beta. If it makes anyone
> > unhappy, we'd best find out sooner not later.
>
> I've not seen any feedback on my "counter"-proposal: switch
> jit_tuple_deforming to off by default. Sure, for the perfect llvmjit use
> cases this will reduce the performance benefits, but it will remove most if
> not all the problematic queries (for instance queries running on many
> partitions, adding/moving columns leading to explosions in compilation
> time...) Of course if there are other troublesome situations, I would love
> being proven wrong.
I doubt that that addresses the problem in any meaningful way. In nearly all
the cases I've looked at expression compilation completely dominates the cost,
due to being instantiated for every partition etc. So I'm rather surprised to
see this claim?
We should add the function deduplication pass for O0, to reduce the cost of
tuple deforming when accessing many partitions, but in my measurements that
isn't the critical path right now.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
view thread (16+ 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], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Change default of jit to off
In-Reply-To: <vhiu76rnwynmtmm3jbkettfelj5l2jtnbkwm7szpiyjbyrmd44@3gdapm3mnu3m>
* 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