Re: [PATCH] heap_insert() and heap_update() optimization - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [PATCH] heap_insert() and heap_update() optimization
Date
Msg-id 20181016195725.arfmep63ri3mwloa@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to [PATCH] heap_insert() and heap_update() optimization  (Andrey Klychkov <aaklychkov@mail.ru>)
Responses Re[2]: [PATCH] heap_insert() and heap_update() optimization  (Andrey Klychkov <aaklychkov@mail.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2018-10-16 11:28:17 +0300, Andrey Klychkov wrote:
> I suggest the small attached patch that gives a bit of heap_insert() and heap_update() optimization
> by reducing calls of BufferGetPage(buffer) into them.
> I measured call time of these:
> heap_insert(): avg origin 13394 ns, avg patched 12685 ns; perf increases +5.59%
> heap_update(): avg origin 15728 ns, avg patched 13936 ns; perf increases +11.39%
> This can be notable when there are handling many rows.

Interesting.  That's with an optimized build, or an assertion build?

Wonder what precisely prevents the optimizer to recognize
BufferGetPage() with a constant argument will always be the same
result.  I assume it's that it doesn't recognize that BufferBlocks can't
change across other function calls?  Might also be the pointer math, or
the if block...

Wonder if we could force the compiler's hand by making BufferGetPage an
inline function and decorating it with __attribute__((pure)) or such.

I see little reason to not apply what you have here, but there's a lot
of other places that access buffers...

Greetings,

Andres Freund


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Large writable variables