From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: refactoring - share str2*int64 functions |
Date: | 2019-09-10 02:22:06 |
Message-ID: | 20190910022206.GA1635@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 03:17:38AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-09-09 14:28:14 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> @@ -80,7 +81,7 @@
>> #define READ_UINT64_FIELD(fldname) \
>> token = pg_strtok(&length); /* skip :fldname */ \
>> token = pg_strtok(&length); /* get field value */ \
>> - local_node->fldname = pg_strtouint64(token, NULL, 10)
>> + (void) pg_strtouint64(token, &local_node->fldname)
>
> Seems like these actually could just ought to use the error-checked
> variants. And I think it ought to change all of
> READ_{INT,UINT,LONG,UINT64,OID}_FIELD, rather than just redirecting one
> of them to the new routines.
Okay for these changes, except for READ_INT_FIELD where we have short
variables using it as well (for example StrategyNumber) so this
generates a justified warning. I think that a correct solution
here would be to add a new READ_SHORT_FIELD which uses pg_strtoint16.
I am not adding that for now.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | gc_11 | 2019-09-10 02:28:07 | 回复:Re: Does PostgreSQL support debian Linux on Arm CPU Platform? |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2019-09-10 02:21:08 | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks |