Re: IndexTupleDSize macro seems redundant

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ildar Musin <i(dot)musin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: IndexTupleDSize macro seems redundant
Date: 2018-01-11 20:32:50
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greetings Tom, Robert, Ildar, all,

* Stephen Frost (sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net) wrote:
> That said, since it's not aligned, regardless of the what craziness the
> compiler might try to pull, we probably shouldn't go casting it
> to something that later hackers might think will be aligned, but we
> should add a comment to clarify that it's not aligned and that we can't
> act like it is.

Updated (combined) patch attached for review. I went through and looked
again to make sure there weren't any cases of making an unaligned
pointer to a struct and didn't see any, and I added some comments to



Attachment Content-Type Size
remove-indextupledsize-v4.patch text/x-diff 14.6 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-01-11 21:04:12 Re: unique indexes on partitioned tables
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2018-01-11 20:25:26 Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)