| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Convert varatt.h macros to static inline functions |
| Date: | 2025-08-03 20:20:31 |
| Message-ID: | 698119.1754252431@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
It looks like the majority vote is still in favor of writing out
DatumGetPointer instead of using "_D()" functions, so let's roll
with that approach.
I looked through our two versions of the varatt.h changes and
merged them. The attached is only cosmetically different from
yours, I think --- mostly, I kept the comments I'd written.
I've tested this atop 0001-0005 from [1], and it all seems good.
I'd like to move along with getting these changes committed, and
then I'll take another look at the 8-byte-datums-everywhere proposal.
regards, tom lane
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/8246d7ff-f4b7-4363-913e-827dadfeb145%40eisentraut.org
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-Convert-varatt.h-access-macros-to-static-inline-f.patch | text/x-diff | 14.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jean-Christophe Arnu | 2025-08-03 23:02:56 | Re: restore_command return code behaviour |
| Previous Message | Paul A Jungwirth | 2025-08-03 19:32:31 | Re: Inval reliability, especially for inplace updates |