Re: Checksums by default?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Checksums by default?
Date: 2017-02-24 20:02:04
Message-ID: 20170224200204.GG23209@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 01:49:07PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 2/24/17 12:30 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >In any case, we can't just build x86-64 packages with compile-time
> >SSE4.1 checks.
>
> Dumb question... since we're already discussing llvm for the executor, would
> that potentially be an option here? AIUI that also opens the possibility of
> using the GPU as well.

Uh, as far as I know, the best you are going to get from llvm is
standard assembly, while the SSE4.1 instructions use special assembly
instructions, so they would be faster, and in a way they are a GPU built
into CPUs.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2017-02-24 20:02:18 Re: case_preservation_and_insensitivity = on
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2017-02-24 19:57:25 Re: case_preservation_and_insensitivity = on