Re: pgsql: Generational memory allocator

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>, pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Generational memory allocator
Date: 2017-11-24 14:29:52
Message-ID: CANP8+jJ+ECfzs80Fi11YgpEjRWAEEShkpiFkxNFu4AvA+M8QiA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

On 24 November 2017 at 09:04, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> On 2017-11-23 22:34:57 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>> Hmmm, I see. Presumably adding this to GenerationChunk (similarly to what we
>>> do in AllocChunkData) would address the issue:
>>>
>>> #if MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF > 4 && SIZEOF_VOID_P == 4
>>> Size padding;
>>> #endif
>>>
>>> but I have no way to verify that (no access to such machine). I wonder why
>>> SlabChunk doesn't need to do that (perhaps a comment explaining that would
>>> be appropriate?).
>
>> Can't you just compile pg on a 32bit system and manually define MAXALIGN
>> to 8 bytes?
>
> I pushed a patch that computes how much padding to add and adds it.
> (It might not really work if size_t and void * are different sizes,
> because then there could be additional padding in the struct; but
> that seems very unlikely.)

Oh, OK, thanks.

It sunk in what was needed while flying, but that's better than my efforts.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2017-11-24 15:35:43 Re: pgsql: Generational memory allocator
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2017-11-24 14:19:50 pgsql: RLS comment fixes.