| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BlockNumber fixes |
| Date: | 2002-07-08 14:19:08 |
| Message-ID: | 17228.1026137948@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I did some research on this and generated the following patch. I didn't
> find much in the way of problems except two vacuum.c fields that should
> probably be BlockNumber. freespace.c also has a numPages field in
> FSMRelation that is int. Should that be BlockNumber?
Not necessary, since the freespace map will never be large enough to
overflow a signed int (it wouldn't fit in the address space if it were).
I think that your changes in vacuum.c are probably unnecessary for the
same reason. I am generally wary of changing values from signed to
unsigned without close analysis of how they are used --- did you look
at *every* comparison involving these fields? How about arithmetic
that might compute a negative result?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-08 14:26:32 | Re: DROP COLUMN Progress |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-08 13:48:02 | Re: Proposal: CREATE CONVERSION |