Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings (was: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15)

From: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com>, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings (was: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15)
Date: 2023-11-06 14:00:57
Message-ID: CAPpHfdvzdft9No6gsNF2QEgBWT44yHSKa+ndTKMc_z3_Z31AoQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 3:42 PM Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 at 17:07, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 4:46 PM Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:
> > > PFE the corrected patchset v58.
> >
> > I'd like to revive this thread.
> >
> > This patchset is extracted from a larger patchset implementing 64-bit xids. It converts page numbers in SLRUs into 64 bits. The most SLRUs save the same file naming scheme, thus their on-disk representation remains the same. However, the patch 0002 converts pg_notify to actually use a new naming scheme. Therefore pg_notify can benefit from simplification and getting rid of wraparound.
> >
> > -#define TransactionIdToCTsPage(xid) \
> > - ((xid) / (TransactionId) COMMIT_TS_XACTS_PER_PAGE)
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Although we return an int64 the actual value can't currently exceeed 2**32.
> > + */
> > +static inline int64
> > +TransactionIdToCTsPage(TransactionId xid)
> > +{
> > + return xid / (int64) COMMIT_TS_XACTS_PER_PAGE;
> > +}
> >
> > Is there any reason we transform macro into a function? If not, I propose to leave this as a macro. BTW, there is a typo in a word "exceeed".
> If I remember right, the compiler will make equivalent code from
> inline functions and macros, and functions has an additional benefit:
> the compiler will report type mismatch if any. That was the only
> reason.

Then it's OK to leave it as an inline function.

> Also, I looked at v58-0001 and don't quite agree with mentioning the
> authors of the original 64-xid patch, from which the current patch is
> derived, as just "privious input" persons.

+1, for converting all "previous input" persons as additional authors.
That would be a pretty long list of authors though.

BTW, I'm a bit puzzled on who should be the first author now?

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nisha Moond 2023-11-06 14:12:21 Re: Intermittent failure with t/003_logical_slots.pl test on windows
Previous Message Alena Rybakina 2023-11-06 13:51:45 Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes