Re: Proposal for internal Numeric to Uint64 conversion function.

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal for internal Numeric to Uint64 conversion function.
Date: 2022-04-05 15:27:09
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYOOCrfO26PGs8kWDCHhOkmvD--E5_8AR_Gwnx-hwhhtw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 4:02 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Pretty much, yeah. I'm way more interested in cleaning up the code
> we have than in making things prettier for hypothetical future
> call sites. In particular, the problem with writing an API in a
> vacuum is that you have little evidence that it's actually useful
> as given (e.g., did you handle error cases in a useful way). If we
> create a numeric_to_int64 that is actually used right away by some
> existing callers, then we've got some evidence that we did it right;
> and then introducing a parallel numeric_to_uint64 is less of a leap
> of faith.

Based on this review and the fact that there's been no new patch since
the original version, I've marked this Returned with Feedback in the
CommitFest.

If Amul decides to update the patch as Tom is describing, he can
reactivate the CommitFest entry at that time.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yura Sokolov 2022-04-05 15:40:52 Re: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations are accessed in a transaction
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2022-04-05 15:25:36 Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file