Re: Comment simplehash/dynahash trade-offs

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David Rowley
Тема Re: Comment simplehash/dynahash trade-offs
Дата
Msg-id CAApHDvp_sW2S6oz0ruPMD6CqzcVdZowp4kg7n+qdg=qMCaaiNg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Comment simplehash/dynahash trade-offs  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Comment simplehash/dynahash trade-offs  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 11:36, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> So, with the current users, we'd stand to lose more than we'd gain
> from doing it that way.

FWIW, I'd be ok with just:

- *       The element type is required to contain a "uint32 status" member.
+ *       The element type is required to contain an integer-based
"status" member
+ *       which can store the range of values defined in the SH_STATUS enum.

David



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: David Rowley
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Comment simplehash/dynahash trade-offs
Следующее
От: Thomas Munro
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: LDAP check flapping on crake due to race