Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Should we add crc32 in libpgport?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we add crc32 in libpgport?
Date: 2012-02-29 00:55:05
Message-ID: 17778.1330476905@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
> Thinking unnecessary.  Motion is progress.  Here is a patch that uses
> this exact plan: pgport for the tables, broken out into a header file
> that is included in the building of libpgport.  I have confirmed by
> objdump -t that multiple copies of the table are not included in the
> postgres binary and the bloat has not occurred.

Applied with minor adjustments; mainly, I cleaned up some additional
traces of the old way of building pg_resetxlog and pg_controldata.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2012-02-29 01:26:48
Subject: Re: 3rd Cluster Hackers Summit, May 15th in Ottawa
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-02-28 22:35:14
Subject: Parameterized-path cost comparisons need some work

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group