From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Possible copy and past error? (\usr\backend\commands\analyze.c) |
Date: | 2020-03-27 23:49:25 |
Message-ID: | 31619.1585352965@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Can someone check if there is a copy and paste error, at file:
> \usr\backend\commands\analyze.c, at lines 2225 and 2226?
> int num_mcv = stats->attr->attstattarget;
> int num_bins = stats->attr->attstattarget;
No, that's intentional I believe. Those are independent variables
that just happen to start out with the same value.
> If they really are the same values, it could be changed to:
> int num_mcv = stats->attr->attstattarget;
> int num_bins = num_mcv;
That would make it look like they are interdependent, which they are not.
> To silence this alert.
If you have a tool that complains about that coding, I think the
tool needs a solid whack upside the head. There's nothing wrong
with the code, and it clearly expresses the intent, which the other
way doesn't. (Or in other words: it's the compiler's job to
optimize away the duplicate fetch. Not the programmer's.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-03-27 23:57:12 | Re: pgbench - refactor init functions with buffers |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-03-27 23:39:11 | Re: allow online change primary_conninfo |