Re: pgbench - refactor init functions with buffers

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgbench - refactor init functions with buffers
Date: 2019-10-22 10:00:13
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.21.1910221155310.15559@lancre
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Hello Dilip,

> - for (i = 0; i < nbranches * scale; i++)
> + for (int i = 0; i < nbranches * scale; i++)
> ...
> - for (i = 0; i < ntellers * scale; i++)
> + for (int i = 0; i < ntellers * scale; i++)
> {
>
> I haven't read the complete patch. But, I have noticed that many
> places you changed the variable declaration from c to c++ style (i.e
> moved the declaration in the for loop). IMHO, generally in PG, we
> don't follow this convention. Is there any specific reason to do
> this?

There are many places where it is used now in pg (120 occurrences in
master, 7 in pgbench). I had a bug recently because of a stupidly reused
index variable, so I tend to use this now it is admissible, moreover here
I'm actually doing a refactoring patch, so it seems ok to include that.

--
Fabien.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2019-10-22 10:11:51 Re: Ordering of header file inclusion
Previous Message Devrim Gündüz 2019-10-22 09:32:53 v12 pg_basebackup fails against older servers (take two)