Re: On disable_cost

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: Jim Finnerty <jfinnert(at)amazon(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: On disable_cost
Date: 2019-12-13 02:59:32
Message-ID: CA+hUKGKuXZjCtfP7o1FcEMKFy051GmkQJG3O3tPTTi645ehR8A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 7:24 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> Doesn't that rely on a specific implementation of double precision (IEEE)?
> I thought that we don't want to limit ourselves to platforms with IEEE floats.

Just by the way, you might want to read the second last paragraph of
the commit message for 02ddd499. The dream is over, we're never going
to run on Vax.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2019-12-13 03:08:31 Re: error context for vacuum to include block number
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2019-12-13 02:49:26 Re: shared tempfile was not removed on statement_timeout (unreproducible)