Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?
От | John Naylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CANWCAZbg_pN72nwaeq5pyBOV__Cbs2=HoUPh8NJW3LuF48JkQw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash? (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 7:08 PM Anton A. Melnikov <a.melnikov@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > It was x86 AMD Laptop: HP Probook 455 g7 with AMD Ryzen 7 4700U and 64GB DDR4 RAM. > OS: Linux 5.15.0-130-generic #140~20.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Dec 18 21:35:34 UTC 2024 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux. > > ~$ valgrind --version > valgrind-3.15.0 Thanks for getting back to us! 3.24 on x86_64 doesn't raise a warning. If anyone believes the difference from a release six years ago represents a regression in diagnostic ability, perhaps that warrants a bug report to Valgrind? > > I'd be inclined to just remove the pg_rightmost_one_pos64 call > > in favor of the other coding you suggest. > > Here is a patch like that. It would be a lot more readable to revert the offending commit instead, since its predecessor had a much simpler bytewise loop. -- John Naylor Amazon Web Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: