Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?

From: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <a(dot)melnikov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Ants Aasma <ants(dot)aasma(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?
Date: 2024-12-19 03:21:39
Message-ID: CANWCAZZ0ptKxEyO504OjZOr3Co=WaSEQG5eUU-TFmqD4twhe_w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 7:10 AM Anton A. Melnikov
<a(dot)melnikov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> Found that https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/0aba2554409ee3251d7558567edd114d8ed36dcc
> produces a valgrind error in initdb.

What architecture and valgrind version is this? We've been bitten
before by different results on Arm vs x86.

The offending code is not even my preferred way to handle the last
word of the string (see f4ad0021af), so if the current way is still
not valgrind-clean, I wonder if we should give up and add an
exception, since we know any garbage bits are masked off.

--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2024-12-19 03:30:37 Re: Shave a few cycles off our ilog10 implementation
Previous Message Richard Guo 2024-12-19 02:50:31 Re: Can rs_cindex be < 0 for bitmap heap scans?