From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF on Windows-32 |
Date: | 2007-07-20 17:42:34 |
Message-ID: | 2e78013d0707201042w22150b65o9a6add4956c77956@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/20/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > The MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF value is set to 8 bytes in a Windows- 32-bit
> > environment. I have very little knowledge about Windows, but at
> > the face of it, this looks strange. Any idea why is this required ?
>
> It's not entirely unreasonable. The same thing happens on HPPA,
> which is nominally a 32-bit architecture but the hardware requires
> 8-byte alignment of doubles (and maybe int64 too, I forget).
> On newer Intel hardware it'd make sense to pad to avoid misaligned
> fetches.
>
> Anyway, we detect this directly based on the C compiler's behavior,
> and you can't argue with the compiler about it. Whatever it's
> doing is right by definition.
>
>
>
Ah, that makes sense. I was confusing myself with 64-bit architectures
and alignments.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2007-07-20 17:44:05 | Re: Memory leak in vac_update_relstats ? |
Previous Message | Bill Moran | 2007-07-20 17:17:04 | Re: 8.2.4 signal 11 with large transaction |