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

Re: pg_buffercache causes assertion failure

From: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_buffercache causes assertion failure
Date: 2005-05-30 23:27:19
Message-ID: 429BA157.4040607@paradise.net.nz (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> 
>>
>> I couldn't use int4 as the underlying datatype is unsigned int (not 
>> available as exposed Pg type). However, using int8 sounds promising 
>> (is int8 larger than unsigned int on 64-bit platforms?).
> 
> 
> Blocknumber is defined as uint32 in block.h - so should always be safe 
> to represent as an int8 I am thinking.
> 
> I will look at patching pg_buffercache, changing numeric -> int8 for the 
> relblocknumber column. This seems a tidier solution than using numeric, 
> and loses the numeric overhead.

This patch changes the use of numeric to int8 to represent the
relblocknumber column.

regards

Mark


Attachment: pg_buffercache.int8.patch
Description: text/plain (3.1 KB)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-05-31 00:08:59
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_buffercache causes assertion failure
Previous:From: Mark KirkwoodDate: 2005-05-30 21:53:20
Subject: Re: pg_buffercache causes assertion failure

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-05-31 00:08:59
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_buffercache causes assertion failure
Previous:From: Mark KirkwoodDate: 2005-05-30 21:53:20
Subject: Re: pg_buffercache causes assertion failure

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