On 2012-12-28 14:59:50 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andres Freund escribió: > > On 2012-12-17 13:16:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > > > On 2012-12-17 12:47:41 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > >> But, if the day ever comes when 64 bits doesn't seem like enough, I bet > > > >> we'd move to 128-bit integers, which will surely be available on all > > > >> platforms by then. So +1 for using plain comparisons --- in fact, I'd > > > >> vote for running around and ripping out the macros altogether. I had > > > >> already been thinking of fixing the places that are still using memset > > > >> to initialize XLRecPtrs to "invalid". > > > > > > > I thought about that and had guessed you would be against it because it > > > > would cause useless diversion of the branches? Otherwise I am all for > > > > it. > > > > > > That's the only argument I can see against doing it --- but Heikki's > > > patch was already pretty invasive in the same areas this would touch, > > > so I'm thinking this won't make back-patching much worse. > > > > I thought a while about this for while and decided its worth trying to > > this before the next review round of xlogreader. > > I have applied these three patches, after merging for recent changes. > Thanks.
Thanks! Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
