Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writablevariables) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writablevariables)
Date
Msg-id 20190108005258.npwbwg6x5wp3t55s@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writablevariables)  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2019-01-07 19:37:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > Hm, shouldn't we extract the perfect hash generation into a perl module
> > or such? It seems that there's plenty other possible uses for it.
>
> Such as?

Builtin functions for one, which we'd swatted down last time round due
to gperfs defficiencies. But I think there's plenty more potential,
e.g. it'd make sense from a performance POV to use a perfect hash
function for locks on builtin objects (the hashtable for lookups therein
shows up prominently in a fair number of profiles, and they are a large
percentage of the acquistions). I'm certain there's plenty more, I've
not though too much about it.


> But in any case, that sounds like a task for someone with
> more sense of Perl style than I have.

John, any chance you could help out with that... :)

Greetings,

Andres Freund


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables)
Next
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: btree.sgml typo?