I wrote: > I did a more thorough scrape of the buildfarm results. Of 161 animals > currently reporting configure output on HEAD, we have
Oh ... take "current" with a grain of salt there, because I just noticed that I typo'd my search condition so that it collected results from all systems that reported since 2022-Oct, rather than in the last month as I'd intended. There are just 137 animals currently reporting. Of those, I broke down the architectures reporting using slicing-by-8: # select arch,count(*) from results where crc = 'slicing-by-8' group by 1 order by 1; arch | count --------------------+------- aarch64 | 1 macppc | 1 mips64eb; -mabi=64 | 1 mips64el; -mabi=32 | 1 ppc64 (power7) | 4 ppc64 (power8) | 2 ppc64le | 7 ppc64le (power8) | 1 ppc64le (power9) | 15 riscv64 | 2 s390x (z15) | 14 sparc | 1 (12 rows) The one machine using slicing-by-8 where there might be a better alternative is arowana, which is CentOS 7 with a pretty ancient gcc version. So I reject the idea that slicing-by-8 is an appropriate baseline for comparisons. There isn't anybody who will see an improvement over current behavior: in the population of interest, just about all platforms are using CRC instructions with or without a runtime check. regards, tom lane