On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 04:33:54PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 15/01/2019 02:52, John Naylor wrote:
> >The majority of cases are measurably faster, and the best case is at
> >least 20x faster. On the whole I'd say this patch is a performance win
> >even without further optimization. I'm marking it ready for committer.
>
> I read through the patch one more time, tweaked the comments a little bit,
> and committed. Thanks for the review!
>
> I did a little profiling of the worst case, where this is slower than the
> old approach. There's a lot of function call overhead coming from walking
> the string with pg_mblen(). That could be improved. If we inlined pg_mblen()
> into loop, it becomes much faster, and I think this code would be faster
> even in the worst case. (Except for the very worst cases, where hash table
> with the new code happens to have a collision at a different point than
> before, but that doesn't seem like a fair comparison.)
>
> I think this is good enough as it is, but if I have the time, I'm going to
> try optimizing the pg_mblen() loop, as well as similar loops e.g. in
> pg_mbstrlen(). Or if someone else wants to give that a go, feel free.
It might be valuable to just inline the UTF8 case.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
