| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: XLByte* usage |
| Date: | 2012-12-17 18:16:47 |
| Message-ID: | 28420.1355768207@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2012-12-17 12:47:41 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But, if the day ever comes when 64 bits doesn't seem like enough, I bet
>> we'd move to 128-bit integers, which will surely be available on all
>> platforms by then. So +1 for using plain comparisons --- in fact, I'd
>> vote for running around and ripping out the macros altogether. I had
>> already been thinking of fixing the places that are still using memset
>> to initialize XLRecPtrs to "invalid".
> I thought about that and had guessed you would be against it because it
> would cause useless diversion of the branches? Otherwise I am all for
> it.
That's the only argument I can see against doing it --- but Heikki's
patch was already pretty invasive in the same areas this would touch,
so I'm thinking this won't make back-patching much worse. The
notational simplification seems worth it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-17 18:23:04 | Re: Makefiles don't seem to remember to rebuild everything anymore |
| Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2012-12-17 18:15:51 | Re: XLByte* usage |