| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Some efforts to get rid of "long" in our codebase |
| Date: | 2025-11-16 23:37:25 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvrsorNRa3uq9inG+xDT-f65azLMyR_j6ucs68DoFKFWTA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 at 13:53, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> v2-0001 wraps the format string as suggested by Heikki, v3-0001 uses
> unsigned long long as suggested by Peter.
>
> v2-0002 is updated to use size_t instead of Size, per Heikki
>
> Any further opinions or votes on v2-0001 vs v3-0001?
Nobody seems to feel strongly either way, so I looked again and
thought that using uint64 is nicer as the size of the type is
explicit. We do want a 64-bit type here, not something bigger, which
in theory, long long could be. The less readable format, IMO seemed
like an ok trade-off to be explicit about the type's size.
With that, I pushed the CATCACHE_STATS patch. I also pushed the
MemSet/MemSetAligned one too.
Thanks for looking.
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2025-11-16 23:54:44 | Re: Dead code in ps_status.c |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-11-16 23:11:52 | Re: pgsql: Drop unnamed portal immediately after execution to completion |