Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes:
> There's another complication though (if the threshold is made
> configurable): the various numeric functions that use mul_var() are
> immutable, which means that the results from the Karatsuba algorithm
> must match those from the schoolbook algorithm exactly, for all
> inputs.
That seems like an impossible standard to meet. What we'd probably
have to do is enable Karatsuba only when mul_var is being asked
for an exact (full-precision) result. This'd complicate the check
condition further, possibly reaching the point where there is a
visible drag on performance in the non-Karatsuba case.
Another possible source of drag: if mul_var is now recursive,
does it need a stack depth check? If we can prove that the
number of recursion levels is no more than O(log(N)) in the
number of input digits, it's probably safe to skip that ...
but I see no such proof here. (In general I find this patch
seriously undercommented.)
> There's a wider question as to how many people use such big numeric
> values -- i.e., how many people are actually going to benefit from
> this? I don't have a good feel for that.
I have heard of people doing calculations on bignum integers in
Postgres, but they are very few and far between --- usually that
sort of task is better done in another language. (No matter how
fast we make mul_var, the general overhead of SQL expressions in
general and type numeric in particular means it's probably not
the right tool for heavy-duty bignum arithmetic.)
There is definitely an argument to be made that this proposal is
not worth the development effort and ongoing maintenance effort
we'd have to sink into it.
regards, tom lane
