| From: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Remove useless casting to the same type |
| Date: | 2025-11-28 14:42:32 |
| Message-ID: | aSm02GCrSWG1pnbW@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 02:20:25PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 28.11.25 10:06, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 09:11:16AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > I think this whole thing could be simplified by overlaying a uint32 over
> > > "data" and just accessing the array fields normally. See attached patch.
> >
> > Indeed, that's a nice simplification.
> >
> > - data += sizeof(uint32) * 2;
> >
> > Is it safe? I mean could XLH_SPLIT_META_UPDATE_MASKS and XLH_SPLIT_META_UPDATE_SPLITPOINT
> > be set simultaneously?
>
> Yes, that's what was probably intended. But apparently not exercised in the
> tests.
>
> So maybe more like this patch.
+ uint32 lowmask = uidata[uidatacount++];
+ uint32 highmask = uidata[uidatacount++];
good idea! That way that's easier to add more branches/flags later if we need
to.
Also, I think that's safe thanks to XLogRecGetBlockData() returning a
MAXALIGNed buffer. Not sure if it's worth to add a comment. I think that a
comment was not needed with the original code as it was using memcpy() instead.
Except for the nit comment remark above, LGTM.
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | cca5507 | 2025-11-28 14:48:41 | Re: Fix comments in execTuples.c |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2025-11-28 14:30:13 | Re: Fix comments in execTuples.c |