Hi,
On 2018-03-29 09:59:55 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I agree. In some email threads Andres has been using "JIT" as a verb,
> too, such as "JITing expressions" and such; that's a bit shocking, in a
> way. Honestly I don't care in a pgsql-hackers thread, I mean we all
> understand what it mea
On 3/29/18 3:27 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> There's an entire section explaining what JIT is and what we currently
> can JIT. We can't just say "compiling of routines (also ...)", because
> a) we don't do that. b) even if you take expressions being JIT compiled
> as that, we also JIT compile tup
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> This technique has bene called JIT since about 1983, and is well-known
> under that name, mostly because of Java. Calling it some made-up name
> we create ourselves is not going to make this more comprehensible to
> users.
+1. You make a goo
On Thursday, March 29, 2018, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-03-29 13:26:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> > Also, in a way, you could argue that v10 already did "compilation of
> > expressions". It didn't compile them to machine language, true, but
> > it translated them into a form which is fast
On 2018-03-29 15:00:36 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> * Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> > On 2018-03-29 13:26:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > I'd go a little further and drop "JIT" from user-facing documentation
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> What we've done elsewhere when there's been similar jargon is to say
> something along the lines of:
>
> "compiling of routines (also known as Just-In-Time or JIT compilation)"
That strike me as roughly analogous to saying:
"hiding rows use
Greetings,
* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> On 2018-03-29 13:26:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > I'd go a little further and drop "JIT" from user-facing documentation
> > > altogether. Instead refer to the feature as "compilatio
On 2018-03-29 13:26:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I'd go a little further and drop "JIT" from user-facing documentation
> > altogether. Instead refer to the feature as "compilation of expressions"
> > or some such. JIT is just jargon. Plus,
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'd go a little further and drop "JIT" from user-facing documentation
> altogether. Instead refer to the feature as "compilation of expressions"
> or some such. JIT is just jargon. Plus, the timing of the compilation is
> actually the least imp
On 3/29/18 9:51 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings Tom, all,
>
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>>> Simon Riggs wrote:
JIT means Just In Time, which could be applied to many concepts and
has been in use for many years in a range of concepts. particula
Greetings Tom, all,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> JIT means Just In Time, which could be applied to many concepts and
> >> has been in use for many years in a range of concepts. particularly in
> >> manufacturing/logistics and project
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> JIT means Just In Time, which could be applied to many concepts and
>> has been in use for many years in a range of concepts. particularly in
>> manufacturing/logistics and project management.
> I agree. In some email threads Andres has been using "
John Naylor wrote:
> > I agree. In some email threads Andres has been using "JIT" as a verb,
> > too, such as "JITing expressions" and such; that's a bit shocking, in a
> > way. Honestly I don't care in a pgsql-hackers thread, I mean we all
> > understand what it means, but in user-facing docs an
> I agree. In some email threads Andres has been using "JIT" as a verb,
> too, such as "JITing expressions" and such; that's a bit shocking, in a
> way. Honestly I don't care in a pgsql-hackers thread, I mean we all
> understand what it means, but in user-facing docs and things we should
> use co
Moving thread to pgsql-hackers.
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 28 March 2018 at 22:23, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > Add documentation for the JIT feature.
>
> Very nice feature and most welcome but we should call it something
> other than just "JIT"
>
> JIT means Just In Time, which could be applied to
15 matches
Mail list logo
