Re: Bugfix and improvements in multixact.c

On 14/06/2024 16:56, Maxim Orlov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> While working on a making multix xact offsets 64-bit [0] I've
> discovered a minor issue. The thing is that type 'xid' is used in
> all macro, but it doesn't correct. Appropriate MultiXactId or
> MultiXactOffset should be used, actually.
>
> And the second thing, as Heikki Linnakangas points out, args naming
> is also misleading.
Thanks!

Looks good to me at a quick glance. I'll try to review and commit these
properly by Monday.

> Additionally, I made an optional patch 0003 to switch from macro to
> inline functions. For me, personally, use of macro functions is
> justified if we are dealing with different argument types, to make
> polymorphic call. Which is not the case here. So, we can have more
> control over types and still generate the same code in terms of
> speed. See https://godbolt.org/z/KM8voadhs Starting from O1 function
> is inlined, thus no overhead is noticeable. Anyway, it's up to the
> actual commiter to decide does it worth it or not. Again, this
> particular patch 0003 is completely optional.
I agree static inline functions are generally easier to work with than
macros. These particular macros were not too bad, though.

I'll bite the bullet and commit this one too unless someone objects.
It's late in the v17 release cycle, but these are local to multixact.c
so there's no risk of breaking extensions, and it seems good to do it
now since we're modifying the macros anyway.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)