From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Raúl Marín Rodríguez <rmrodriguez(at)carto(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pow support for pgbench |
Date: | 2017-11-04 11:34:52 |
Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.20.1711041223391.14090@lancre |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Raúl,
> Sorry about the patch. Attaching it now so it can be considered as
> submitted.
There is a typo in the XML doc:
<literal>1024.0/<literal>
Please check that the documentation compiles.
I'm at odds with having the integer version rely on a double pow(), even
if it works. I think that there should be a specific integer version which
does use integer operations. From stack overflow, the following is
suggested:
int ipow(int base, int exp)
{
int result = 1;
while (exp)
{
if (exp & 1)
result *= base;
exp >>= 1;
base *= base;
}
return result;
}
The integer version should be when x & y are integers *AND* y >= 0.
if y is a negative integer, the double version should be used.
--
Fabien.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-11-04 13:14:33 | Re: Add some const decorations to prototypes |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-11-04 11:08:31 | Re: [POC] Faster processing at Gather node |