Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification
Date: 2018-04-01 03:09:46
Message-ID: CAH2-WznHLhwjcdRdX4xU6YX8oxFYrToZdgCPHFTBwZ7tUbQ__g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 8:08 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> round() is from C99, apparently. I'll investigate a fix.
>
> Just replacing it with a floor(val + 0.5) ought to do the trick, right?

I was thinking of using rint(), which is what you get if you call
round(float8) from SQL.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2018-04-01 03:25:24 Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification
Previous Message Andres Freund 2018-04-01 03:08:31 Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification