Re: tid_blockno() and tid_offset() accessor functions

From: Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>
Cc: Alexandre Felipe <o(dot)alexandre(dot)felipe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari(dot)slg01(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: tid_blockno() and tid_offset() accessor functions
Date: 2026-03-09 13:34:46
Message-ID: CAKAnmm+gW9J4hr38g0uSUsswAVq+=bUYSSXp9tZrMegLyWieOg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Mar 8, 2026 at 3:31 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> wrote:

> No opinion. For displaying the bogus TID value (like "(-1,0)") it's
> probably OK to show values that are a bit weird. If anything, we should
> be more careful on input, it's too late for tid_block() to decide what to
> do with an "impossible" TID value.
>

This one doesn't sit right with me. I think it's not too late. No reason
why tid_block cannot be stricter here than tid itself and complain. Other
than that, the patch looks good to me.

Cheers,
Greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nazir Bilal Yavuz 2026-03-09 13:43:00 Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD
Previous Message Manni Wood 2026-03-09 13:31:39 Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD