| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Removed extra memory allocations from create_list_bounds |
| Date: | 2021-07-06 00:27:29 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvojW2g_oXGTjGUtf9kBFGuxr8rxB+WvzGhZK0C-vLJkhQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 05:03, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Also, if you're going to remove the initializations here, maybe you'd also
> change i and j to C99 "for" declarations like "for (int i=0, j=0; ...)"
>
> - PartitionListValue **all_values = NULL;
> - ListCell *cell;
> - int i = 0;
> - int ndatums = 0;
> + PartitionListValue *all_values;
> + int i;
> + int j;
> + int ndatums;
>
> Same in get_non_null_list_datum_count()
I tend to only get motivated to use that for new code that does not
exist in back-branches. I'll maybe stop doing that when we no longer
have to support the pre-C99 versions of the code.
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2021-07-06 00:40:02 | Re: Minor typo in generate_useful_gather_paths comment |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2021-07-06 00:26:19 | Re: Removed extra memory allocations from create_list_bounds |