| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Size vs size_t |
| Date: | 2017-03-16 20:59:29 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ7F-TeqqstK46+Q2ymgFHB1qx6N6BxRcLRSAw0ZbCjOA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Noticing that the assembled hackers don't seem to agree on $SUBJECT in
> new patches, I decided to plot counts of lines matching \<Size\> and
> \<size_t\> over time. After a very long run in the lead, size_t has
> recently been left in the dust by Size.
I guess I assumed that we wouldn't have defined PG-specific types if
we wanted to just use the OS-supplied ones.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-03-16 21:01:31 | Re: new set of psql patches for loading (saving) data from (to) text, binary files |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-03-16 20:59:18 | Re: ON CONFLICT with constraint name doesn't work |