Re: Simplifying our Trap/Assert infrastructure

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Simplifying our Trap/Assert infrastructure
Date: 2022-10-09 21:08:39
Message-ID: 3943009.1665349719@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 03:51:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hence, I propose the attached.

> The patch LGTM. It might be worth removing usages of AssertArg and
> AssertState, too, but that can always be done separately.

Something I thought about but forgot to mention in the initial email:
is it worth sprinkling these macros with "unlikely()"? I think that
compilers might assume the right thing automatically based on noticing
that ExceptionalCondition is noreturn ... but then again they might
not. Of course we're not that fussed about micro-optimizations in
assert-enabled builds; but with so many Asserts in the system, it
might still add up to something noticeable if there is an effect.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2022-10-09 21:13:48 Re: use has_privs_of_role() for pg_hba.conf
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2022-10-09 21:01:48 Re: Simplifying our Trap/Assert infrastructure