Re: PgStat_HashKey padding issue when passed by reference
От | Sami Imseih |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PgStat_HashKey padding issue when passed by reference |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA5RZ0tcMbN0mE+SfLfB94509XzaQqtcsM5B7VhH___mzgY5_A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PgStat_HashKey padding issue when passed by reference (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: PgStat_HashKey padding issue when passed by reference
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 09:36:52PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote: > > But my concern is the flexibility of this approach. If someone is to add an > > OID field next, they will not be able to as that will be introducing > > padding. On the other hand, passing the key by reference and > > documenting the reason in pgstat_shmem.c will not lose this > > flexibility. > > I don't mind discarding the static assertion idea, but at the end what > counts for me here is that I don't want to sacrifice future changes in > the pgstats code that would always require passing around the hash key > by reference. I don't see how this improves the situation, but will just make it more difficult to add a new field that requires padding in the future. If we are documenting either way, I rather that we just document the need to pass a key by reference, which is the pattern used in other areas ( see pgss_store and entry_alloc in pg_stat_statements.c ) Others may have a different opinion. -- Sami
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: