From: | Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Should we use MemSet or {0} for struct initialization? |
Date: | 2023-08-31 09:56:58 |
Message-ID: | CAEG8a3LFWuVzXbHpBuG8+cKp_QdiqMUdEZwX+pEU5ptUOPh1Og@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 5:34 PM Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> While working on a bug in expandRecordVariable() I noticed that in the
> switch statement for case RTE_SUBQUERY we initialize struct ParseState
> with {0} while for case RTE_CTE we do that with MemSet. I understand
> that there is nothing wrong with this, just cannot get away with the
> inconsistency inside the same function (sorry for the nitpicking).
>
> Do we have a preference for how to initialize structures? From 9fd45870
> it seems that we prefer to {0}. So here is a trivial patch doing that.
> And with a rough scan the MemSet calls in pg_stat_get_backend_subxact()
> can also be replaced with {0}, so include that in the patch too.
>
> Thanks
> Richard
If the struct has padding or aligned, {0} only guarantee the struct
members initialized to 0, while memset sets the alignment/padding
to 0 as well, but since we will not access the alignment/padding, so
they give the same effect.
I bet {0} should be faster since there is no function call, but I'm not
100% sure ;)
--
Regards
Junwang Zhao
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2023-08-31 10:00:00 | Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2023-08-31 09:45:34 | Re: Sync scan & regression tests |