Re: Making type Datum be 8 bytes everywhere
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Making type Datum be 8 bytes everywhere |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2073720.1753972057@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Making type Datum be 8 bytes everywhere (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Making type Datum be 8 bytes everywhere
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes: > On 30.07.25 18:06, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'm giving the traditional names to the Pointer variants because it >> turns out that way more places would have to change if we do it the >> other way: in a rough count, about 50 versus about 1700. (This is >> counting only the core backend.) Beyond that, though, bikeshedding >> on the naming is welcome. > 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. One interesting thing I noted is that in some modules we already were applying DatumGetPointer where needed (mostly, at least). The patch I just posted in your other thread also simplifies those cases to use the "_D" notation, which makes it longer than strictly necessary. But I think consistency of notation is good. > There is precedent for having two different functions, though, like > att_addlength_pointer() and att_addlength_datum(). Yeah ... those two macros could stand to be cleaned up too, per the notes in their comments. But I don't think we need to fix that today. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: