| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Making type Datum be 8 bytes everywhere |
| Date: | 2025-07-31 23:28:47 |
| Message-ID: | aIv8L_acvtJBWkC5@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 10:27:37AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
>> In my patch, I just added the missing DatumGetPointer() calls, which
>> seemed easy enough.
>
> I had an earlier patch version that also did that, but it seemed
> kind of verbose to me: adding "_D" is much shorter than adding
> "DatumGetPointer()", and fewer parens seems good for readability.
I have mixed feelings about that, but as long as one is easily able to
detect that they should not pass a Datum. At the end, I'm kind of
OK-ish with the addition of the _D flavors to have a shortcut for the
VARDATA/DatumGetPointer() patterns, as an option. So I'd put +0.5.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM | 2025-07-31 23:31:17 | Add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in pg_buffercache_pages while scanning the buffers |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-07-31 23:18:43 | Re: Datum as struct |