Re: pgsql: Further code review for pg_lsn data type.
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Further code review for pg_lsn data type. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5305BB46.5000204@vmware.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Further code review for pg_lsn data type. (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql: Further code review for pg_lsn data type.
|
Список | pgsql-committers |
On 02/20/2014 09:47 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2014-02-20 08:25:01 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> On 02/20/2014 02:56 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >>> On 2014-02-19 15:10:52 +0000, Robert Haas wrote: >>>> Change input function error messages to be more consistent with what is >>>> done elsewhere. Remove a bunch of redundant type casts, so that the >>>> compiler will warn us if we screw up. Don't pass LSNs by value on >>>> platforms where a Datum is only 32 bytes, per buildfarm. Move macros >>>> for packing and unpacking LSNs to pg_lsn.h so that we can include >>>> access/xlogdefs.h, to avoid an unsatisfied dependency on XLogRecPtr. >>> >>> Hm, won't >>> #define DatumGetLSN(X) ((XLogRecPtr) DatumGetInt64(X)) >>> #define LSNGetDatum(X) (Int64GetDatum((int64) (X))) >>> possibly truncate the value if it's larger than 2^(63-1) as int is >>> signed but XLogRecPtr is unsigned? >> >> No. Casting between unsigned and signed integers of same width doesn't lose >> information. For example with 16-bit integers, casting unsigned 40000 to >> signed gives -25536. Casting signed -25536 back to unsigned gives back >> 40000. > > Are you sure? > > 6.3.1.3 Signed and unsigned integers, paragraph 3: > "Otherwise, the new type is signed and the value cannot be represented > in it; either the result is implementation-defined or an > implementation-defined signal is raised." > > Afaik unsigned to signed always safe, but not the other way round? Oh, that's interesting, I didn't know that. We do signed to unsigned conversions in a few places: $ grep -r -I PG_GETARG_INT . | grep uint ./src/backend/access/hash/hashfunc.c: return hash_uint32((int32) PG_GETARG_INT16(0)); ./src/backend/access/hash/hashfunc.c: return hash_uint32(PG_GETARG_INT32(0)); ./src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c: uint32 value = (uint32) PG_GETARG_INT32(0); ./src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c: uint64 value = (uint64) PG_GETARG_INT64(0); And in fact, the SET_X_BYTES macros also work by casting the value to an unsigned integer. So if signed -> unsigned is undefined, then the behavior of IntXGetDatum macros is also undefined. - Heikki
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: