Hi,
Any plans regarding committing this patch? I see the thread is silent
since September 24, when the last patch version was posted. The patch is
already marked as RFC since December, when David changed the status. I
don't have any opinion whether the patch is RFC or not (it might well
be), but
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 01:16:36PM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> > "David" == David Fetter writes:
>
> David> + return pg_ltostr_zeropad(str, (uint32)0 - (uint32)value, minwidth -
> 1);
>
> No, this is just reintroducing the undefined behavior again. Once the
> value has been converted to
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 10:28:09AM +0200, Tels wrote:
> Moin,
>
> On 2019-09-22 23:58, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:29:25AM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> > > > "David" == David Fetter writes:
>
> > Fixed.
>
> Good work, more performance is sure nice :)
>
> Noticed
> "David" == David Fetter writes:
David> + return pg_ltostr_zeropad(str, (uint32)0 - (uint32)value, minwidth -
1);
No, this is just reintroducing the undefined behavior again. Once the
value has been converted to unsigned you can't cast it back to signed or
pass it to a function expecting
Moin,
On 2019-09-22 23:58, David Fetter wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:29:25AM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> "David" == David Fetter writes:
Fixed.
Good work, more performance is sure nice :)
Noticed one more thing in the patch:
- *start++ = *a;
-
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:29:25AM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> > "David" == David Fetter writes:
>
> David> +static inline uint32
> David> +decimalLength64(const uint64_t v)
>
> Should be uint64, not uint64_t.
Fixed.
> Also return an int, not a uint32.
Fixed.
> For int vs. int32, my
> "David" == David Fetter writes:
David> +static inline uint32
David> +decimalLength64(const uint64_t v)
Should be uint64, not uint64_t.
Also return an int, not a uint32.
For int vs. int32, my own inclination is to use "int" where the value is
just a (smallish) number, especially one
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 03:36:21AM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> > "David" == David Fetter writes:
>
> David> + /* Compute the result string. */
> David> + if (value >= 1)
> David> + {
> David> + const uint32 value2 = value % 1;
> David> +
>
> "David" == David Fetter writes:
David> + /* Compute the result string. */
David> + if (value >= 1)
David> + {
David> + const uint32 value2 = value % 1;
David> +
David> + const uint32 c = value2 % 1;
David> +
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 11:09:16PM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 09:14:51PM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 04:27:46PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > > Hello.
> > >
> > > At Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:42:01 +0200, David Fetter wrote
> > > in
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 09:14:51PM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 04:27:46PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > At Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:42:01 +0200, David Fetter wrote
> > in <20190918034201.gx31...@fetter.org>
> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:01:57AM +0200,
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 04:27:46PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Hello.
>
> At Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:42:01 +0200, David Fetter wrote in
> <20190918034201.gx31...@fetter.org>
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:01:57AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:55:05AM +0200, David
Hello.
At Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:42:01 +0200, David Fetter wrote in
<20190918034201.gx31...@fetter.org>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:01:57AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:55:05AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 09:18:49AM +0200, David Fetter
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 07:51:42AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:42:01AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:01:57AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:55:05AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:42:01AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:01:57AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:55:05AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 09:18:49AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > > > Folks,
> > > >
> > > > Please
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:01:57AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:55:05AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 09:18:49AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > Please find attached a couple of patches intended to $subject.
> > >
> > > This
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:55:05AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 09:18:49AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > Please find attached a couple of patches intended to $subject.
> >
> > This patch set cut the time to copy ten million rows of randomly sized
> > int8s
On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 09:18:49AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Please find attached a couple of patches intended to $subject.
>
> This patch set cut the time to copy ten million rows of randomly sized
> int8s (10 of them) by about a third, so at least for that case, it's
> pretty
On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 02:06:29PM +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> > 15 сент. 2019 г., в 12:18, David Fetter написал(а):
> >
> > Please find attached a couple of patches intended to $subject.
> >
> > This patch set cut the time to copy ten million rows of randomly sized
> > int8s (10 of them) by
> 15 сент. 2019 г., в 12:18, David Fetter написал(а):
>
> Please find attached a couple of patches intended to $subject.
>
> This patch set cut the time to copy ten million rows of randomly sized
> int8s (10 of them) by about a third, so at least for that case, it's
> pretty decent.
Hi!
Folks,
Please find attached a couple of patches intended to $subject.
This patch set cut the time to copy ten million rows of randomly sized
int8s (10 of them) by about a third, so at least for that case, it's
pretty decent.
Thanks to Andrew Gierth for lots of patient help.
Best,
David.
--
21 matches
Mail list logo
