On 08/27/2014 08:13 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
On Mon, 2014-08-25 at 17:41 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
your patch seems to be about 2x-3x as slow as unpatched master. So this
needs some optimization. A couple of ideas:
I didn't see anywhere near that kind of regression. On unpatched master,
wi
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 22:13 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Attached a patch implementing the same idea though: only use the
> multibyte path if *both* the escape char and the current character from
> the pattern are multibyte.
Forgot to mention: with this patch, the test completes in about 720ms,
so j
On Mon, 2014-08-25 at 17:41 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Actually, that gets optimized to a constant in the planner:
Oops, thank you (and Tom).
> your patch seems to be about 2x-3x as slow as unpatched master. So this
> needs some optimization. A couple of ideas:
I didn't see anywhere nea
On 08/25/2014 06:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
On 08/25/2014 04:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
[ scratches head... ] Surely similar_escape is marked immutable, and
will therefore be executed exactly once in either of these formulations,
because the planner will fold the expression
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 08/25/2014 04:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> [ scratches head... ] Surely similar_escape is marked immutable, and
>> will therefore be executed exactly once in either of these formulations,
>> because the planner will fold the expression to a constant.
> Yeah, just not
On 08/25/2014 04:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
On 07/12/2014 05:16 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
I was able to see about a 2% increase in runtime when using the
similar_escape function directly. I made a 10M tuple table and did:
explain analyze
select
similar_escape('ΣΣΣΣΣΣÎ
On 07/12/2014 05:16 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
On Fri, 2014-07-11 at 11:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Davis writes:
Attached is a small patch to $SUBJECT.
In master, only single-byte characters are allowed as an escape. Of
course, with the patch it must still be a single character, but it may
be m
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 07/12/2014 05:16 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> I was able to see about a 2% increase in runtime when using the
>> similar_escape function directly. I made a 10M tuple table and did:
>>
>> explain analyze
>> select
>> similar_escape('ΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣΣÎ
On 07/12/2014 05:16 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
I was able to see about a 2% increase in runtime when using the
similar_escape function directly. I made a 10M tuple table and did:
explain analyze
select
similar_escape('','#')
On Fri, 2014-07-11 at 11:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Davis writes:
> > Attached is a small patch to $SUBJECT.
> > In master, only single-byte characters are allowed as an escape. Of
> > course, with the patch it must still be a single character, but it may
> > be multi-byte.
>
> I'm concerne
Jeff Davis writes:
> Attached is a small patch to $SUBJECT.
> In master, only single-byte characters are allowed as an escape. Of
> course, with the patch it must still be a single character, but it may
> be multi-byte.
I'm concerned about the performance cost of this patch. Have you done
any me
On Fri, 2014-07-11 at 14:41 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Could you add the patch into next CF?
Sure. The patch is so small I was thinking about committing it in a few
days (assuming no complaints), but I'm in no hurry.
> The patch doesn't contain the change of the document. But I think that
> it's
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Attached is a small patch to $SUBJECT.
>
> In master, only single-byte characters are allowed as an escape. Of
> course, with the patch it must still be a single character, but it may
> be multi-byte.
+1
Probably you know that, multi-byte cha
Attached is a small patch to $SUBJECT.
In master, only single-byte characters are allowed as an escape. Of
course, with the patch it must still be a single character, but it may
be multi-byte.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
*** a/src/backend/utils/adt/regexp.c
--- b/src/backend/utils/adt/regexp.c
*
14 matches
Mail list logo
