palloc() vs static define?

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: palloc() vs static define?
Date: 1998-12-14 03:42:02
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.05.9812132335480.6029-100000@thelab.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


in commands/cluster.c, in function cluster, we define NewIndexName as:

char NewIndexName[NAMEDATALEN]; /* line 93 */

in function copy_index, we define it as:

char *NewIndexName; /* line 246 */

And then palloc(NAMEDATALEN) before it gets used...

Now, which we use doesn't much matter to me, but I would think some sort
of consistency would be in order...or am I missing something as far as
each are concerned? Is one method inheriently faster then another, or do
they have about the same performance characteristics?

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 1998-12-14 03:49:31 Please check: commands/dbcommands.c
Previous Message The Hermit Hacker 1998-12-14 03:31:06 catalog/heap.c...