Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size
Date
Msg-id CA+HiwqEB2qqYYCU=xLqyfp2tWEc_Bj4=rouN7mA9Vr+aeCyLpQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 11:55 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 11:09 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 12:37 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > > On 2022-07-19 20:40:11 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > > About that, I was wondering if the blocks in llvm_compile_expr() need
> > > > to be hand-coded to match what's added in ExecInterpExpr() or if I've
> > > > missed some tool that can be used instead?
> > >
> > > The easiest way is to just call an external function for the implementation of
> > > the step. But yes, otherwise you need to handcraft it.
> >
> > Ok, thanks.
> >
> > So I started updating llvm_compile_expr() for handling the new
> > ExprEvalSteps that the patch adds to ExecExprInterp(), but quickly
> > realized that code could have been consolidated into less code, or
> > IOW, into fewer new ExprEvalSteps.  So, I refactored things that way
> > and am now retrying adding the code to llvm_compile_expr() based on
> > new, better consolidated, code.
> >
> > Here's the updated version, without the llvm pieces, in case you'd
> > like to look at it even in this state.  I'll post a version with llvm
> > pieces filled in tomorrow.   (I have merged the different patches into
> > one for convenience.)
>
> And here's a version with llvm pieces filled in.
>
> Because I wrote all of it while not really understanding how the LLVM
> constructs like blocks and branches work, the only reason I think
> those llvm_compile_expr() additions may be correct is that all the
> tests in jsonb_sqljson.sql pass even if I add the following line at
> the top:
>
> set jit_above_cost to 0;

Oh and I did build --with-llvm. :-)


--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Junwang Zhao
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] eliminate duplicate code in table.c
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw: Fix bug in checking of return value of PQsendQuery().