Re: Why not use the calloc to replace malloc?
От | Thorsten Glaser |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why not use the calloc to replace malloc? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 41c9d7f-7953-d22c-12f1-e83815cb5d9e@evolvis.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why not use the calloc to replace malloc? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why not use the calloc to replace malloc?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 22 Apr 2023, Tom Lane wrote: >Wen Yi <chuxuec@outlook.com> writes: >> [ use calloc to replace zeroing fields individually ] […] >People have complained about this practice off-and-on, but no one has >provided any evidence that there's a significant performance cost. >The maintenance benefits are real though. Oh, interesting ;-) Thanks for this explanation. Another data point is: calloc is not correct for pointer fields, you have to manually assign NULL to them afterwards still, because NULL doesn’t have to be represented by all-zero bytes (e.g. TenDRA supports having 0x55555555 as NULL pointer as an option). bye, //mirabilos -- 15:41⎜<Lo-lan-do:#fusionforge> Somebody write a testsuite for helloworld :-)
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: