Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size
Date
Msg-id 20230222224713.m65d55udzlq5mpbz@awork3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2023-02-22 16:34:44 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> >> Maybe it's worth sticking a StaticAssert() for the struct size
> >> somewhere.
> 
> > Indeed.  I thought we had one already.
> 
> >> I'm a bit wary about that being too noisy, there are some machines with
> >> odd alignment requirements. Perhaps worth restricting the assertion to
> >> x86-64 + armv8 or such?
> 
> > I'd put it in first and only reconsider if it shows unfixable problems.
> 
> Now that we've got the sizeof(ExprEvalStep) under control, shouldn't
> we do the attached?

Indeed. Pushed.

Let's hope there's no rarely used architecture with odd alignment rules.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add pretty-printed XML output option
Next
From: Zheng Li
Date:
Subject: Re: Support logical replication of DDLs