Andres Freund writes:
> On 2015-05-21 16:49:27 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I considered also adding a Static_assert about sizeof(ItemIdData),
>> but I'm afraid that compilers that don't support these pragmas
>> probably don't support Static_assert either, so it's not clear
>> that that would catch a
Piotr Stefaniak writes:
> On 05/21/2015 10:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's not clear to me whether all compilers that accept "packed" also
>> accept "aligned", but there are enough ARM machines in the buildfarm
>> that we could hope that we'll find out if this isn't portable.
> I think src/include
On 2015-05-21 16:49:27 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I considered also adding a Static_assert about sizeof(ItemIdData),
> but I'm afraid that compilers that don't support these pragmas
> probably don't support Static_assert either, so it's not clear
> that that would catch anything.
I think your fallba
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 05/21/2015 04:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I wonder whether we should drop the ARM assumption and instead write
>>
>> #if defined(pg_attribute_packed) && defined(pg_attribute_aligned)
>> pg_attribute_packed()
>> pg_attribute_aligned(2)
>> #endif
>>
>> so that the annotat
On 05/21/2015 04:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
But BlockIdData is laid out and accessed as two 16-bit fields, so there
should be no problem. On what platform exactly do you see a failure?
Ah, after reading the gcc manual a bit more closely, I get the point.
For some reason I think we assume
I wrote:
> But BlockIdData is laid out and accessed as two 16-bit fields, so there
> should be no problem. On what platform exactly do you see a failure?
Ah, after reading the gcc manual a bit more closely, I get the point.
For some reason I think we assumed that "packed" would not result in
misa
On 2015-05-21 15:34:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Piotr Stefaniak writes:
> > But due to how ExecRowMark struct is laid out in memory, the packed
> > struct ItemPointerData begins at an uneven offset, leading to misaligned
> > access whenever BlockIdData is set by ItemPointerSetInvalid() (and
> >
Piotr Stefaniak writes:
> But due to how ExecRowMark struct is laid out in memory, the packed
> struct ItemPointerData begins at an uneven offset, leading to misaligned
> access whenever BlockIdData is set by ItemPointerSetInvalid() (and
> likely in some other places, too).
But BlockIdData is
