Re: [PATCH] Optimize json_lex_string by batching character copying - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: [PATCH] Optimize json_lex_string by batching character copying
Date
Msg-id 20220823171546.GA1207981@nathanxps13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Optimize json_lex_string by batching character copying  (John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Optimize json_lex_string by batching character copying
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 01:03:03PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 10:32 AM Nathan Bossart
>> Here's a new version of the patch with the 32-bit changes and calls to
>> lfind() removed.
> 
> LGTM overall. My plan is to split out the json piece, adding tests for
> that, and commit the infrastructure for it fairly soon. Possible
> bikeshedding: Functions like vector8_eq() might be misunderstood as
> comparing two vectors, but here we are comparing each lane with a
> scalar. I wonder if vector8_eq_scalar() et al might be more clear.

Good point.  I had used vector32_veq() to denote vector comparison, which
would extend to something like vector8_seq().  But that doesn't seem
descriptive enough.  It might be worth considering vector8_contains() or
vector8_has() as well.  I don't really have an opinion, but if I had to
pick something, I guess I'd choose vector8_contains().

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zhihong Yu
Date:
Subject: handling multiple matching constraints in DetachPartitionFinalize()
Next
From: "Jonathan S. Katz"
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL/JSON features for v15