Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins
Date
Msg-id 199905100435.AAA23320@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom, you fixed this, right?


> Erik Riedel <riedel+@CMU.EDU> writes:
> > Platform:  Alpha, Digital UNIX 4.0D 
> > [ memutils.h says ]
> >  /*
> >   * even though "long alignment" should really be on 8-byte boundaries for
> >   * linuxalpha, we want the strictest alignment to be on 4-byte (int)
> >   * boundaries, because otherwise things break when they try to use the
> >   * FormData_pg_* structures.  --djm 12/12/96
> >   */
> 
> I remember looking at that code and saying "Huh?  You can't do that!".
> I kept my fingers off it because I didn't have direct proof that it
> was broken ... but it sounds like you do.
> 
> > Can someone explain the comment from djm to me (or is djm still
> > listening somewhere?).  At first blush, I suspect that I actually
> > _want_ it to do the latter version of LONGALIGN(), since my longs
> > really are 8 bytes.  But when I try to do that instead, I am unable to
> > even run "initdb" - dies with an error like "attribute not
> > found/invalid"
> 
> Yeah, that's about what I'd expect.  The point is that the struct
> layouts found in include/catalog/pg_*.h for system table records
> have to match the actual physical layout of tuples on disk.  What
> you are probably running into is that the attribute size/alignment
> calculations done by the heaptuple code using the declared column data
> types fail to match up with the struct field alignment done by the
> compiler.
> 
> My guess is that either a struct field is being declared "long" when
> it really oughta be "int", or some part of the tuple storage routines
> is applying LONGALIGN() when it only oughta apply INTALIGN().  This
> is something that would be difficult to track down or verify without
> a box on which sizeof(int) != sizeof(long), so I haven't gone after it.
> If you have time, please leave memutils.h with the more reasonable
> looking definition of LONGALIGN() and go looking to find out which
> system table has the sizing conflict.
> 
> BTW, we'd run into this same problem if any of the system tables had
> a float8 column, since the alignment of those is platform-dependent.
> Memo to hackers: stay away from float8 in sys tables.
> 
>             regards, tom lane
> 
> 


--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Hiroshi Inoue"
Date:
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] INSERT INTO