From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Remove traces of long in dynahash.c |
Date: | 2025-08-19 21:01:49 |
Message-ID: | d6fe1d30-082a-48bc-8221-7d5ea5971af0@eisentraut.org |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 19.08.25 08:24, Michael Paquier wrote:
> While looking at the recent business with dynahash.c in [1], I have
> been reminded of the fact that this code still depends on long.
It's definitely a good idea to get rid of "long" usage. But you can
also replace it with long long instead of int64. I suppose this is a
stylistic question, but I would tend to use the intNN types only when I
need exactly that many bits.
Also, your patch changes from signed to unsigned types. Maybe that's
ok, but you didn't explain it.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-08-19 21:05:00 | Re: Remove Instruction Synchronization Barrier in spin_delay() for ARM64 architecture |
Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-08-19 20:59:39 | Re: Improve LWLock tranche name visibility across backends |