Re: Some remaining htonl() and ntohl() calls in the code - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Some remaining htonl() and ntohl() calls in the code
Date
Msg-id 20201014204123.vcewobvt3bp4jr7h@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Some remaining htonl() and ntohl() calls in the code  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Some remaining htonl() and ntohl() calls in the code  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2020-10-14 14:53:03 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Since 510b8cbf, we have in-core equivalents for htonl(), ntohl() & co
> through pg_bswap.h that allows to compile with a built-in function if
> the compiler used has one.
> 
> All the existing calls in the code tree have been changed with
> 0ba99c84 for performance reasons (except the libpq examples), however
> the FE/BE code of GSSAPI encryption code did not get this call in
> b0b39f7.  I think that we had better switch to the built-ins functions
> as well for this case.  The argument of consistency matters here, but
> also perhaps the argument of performance, where it may not be easy to
> measure a difference.

+1

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: More aggressive vacuuming of temporary tables
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Minor documentation error regarding streaming replication protocol