Re: Range checks of pg_test_fsync --secs-per-test and pg_test_timing --duration

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Range checks of pg_test_fsync --secs-per-test and pg_test_timing --duration
Date: 2020-09-25 05:52:10
Message-ID: 1dba85f6-6bdd-0cd8-1287-d1c208bf0421@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-09-24 09:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 08:11:59AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> This patch mixes up unsigned int and uint32 in random ways. The variable is
>> uint32, but the format is %u and the max constant is UINT_MAX.
>>
>> I think just use unsigned int as the variable type. There is no need to use
>> the bit-exact types. Note that the argument of alarm() is of type unsigned
>> int.
>
> Makes sense, thanks.

looks good to me

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Sharma 2020-09-25 06:12:29 Re: Logical replication from PG v13 and below to PG v14 (devel version) is not working.
Previous Message Katsuragi Yuta 2020-09-25 05:46:00 Re: [PATCH] Add features to pg_stat_statements