Re: Question about an inconsistency - 1

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Question about an inconsistency - 1
Дата
Msg-id 3260.1467836527@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Question about an inconsistency - 1  ("petrum@gmail.com" <petrum@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
"petrum@gmail.com" <petrum@gmail.com> writes:
> I have a question regarding the source code in file pg_proc.h (postgresql-9.4.4).

> At line 1224 (copied below) why the 28th identifier is timestamp_eq?

> DATA(insert OID = 1152 (  timestamptz_eq   PGNSP PGUID 12 1 0 0 0 f f f t t f i 2 0 16 "1184 1184" _null_ _null_
_null__null_ timestamp_eq _null_ _null_ _null_ ));
 

> I would expect it to be timestamptz_eq (the same as the 5th identifier
> from the same line).

If timestamptz_eq actually existed as a separate C function, then yes that
would be correct.  But see this bit in timestamp.h:

extern int    timestamp_cmp_internal(Timestamp dt1, Timestamp dt2);

/* timestamp comparison works for timestamptz also */
#define timestamptz_cmp_internal(dt1,dt2)    timestamp_cmp_internal(dt1, dt2)

AFAICS there are not similar #defines equating timestamptz_eq to
timestamp_eq and so on, probably because we don't have much need
to refer to those functions in the C code.  But even if we had
such #defines, I think that pg_proc.h could not rely on them.
It has to reference actual C functions.
        regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver
Следующее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <