Re: widen vacuum buffer counters - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: widen vacuum buffer counters
Date
Msg-id 20200201095256.GC4133@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: widen vacuum buffer counters  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: widen vacuum buffer counters
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 05:13:53PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> +1 for widening these counters, but since they're global variables, -0.2
> or so for back-patching.  I don't know of any reason that an extension
> would be touching these, but I feel like the problem isn't severe enough
> to justify taking an ABI-break risk.

I would not recommend doing a back-patch because of that.  I don't
think that's worth taking any risk.  Extension authors can have a lot
of imagination.

> Also, %zd is the wrong format code for int64.  Recommended practice
> these days is to use "%lld" with an explicit cast of the printf argument
> to long long (just to be sure).  That doesn't work safely before v12,
> and if you did insist on back-patching further, you'd need to jump
> through hoops to avoid having platform-specific format codes in a
> translatable string.  (The side-effects for translation seem like
> an independent argument against back-patching.)

Surely you meant INT64_FORMAT here?  Anyway, looking at the patch,
couldn't we just use uint64?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Prevent pg_basebackup running as root
Next
From: Dent John
Date:
Subject: Re: polymorphic table functions light