Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more)
Date
Msg-id 2942266.1727046406@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more)  (Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>)
Responses Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more)
List pgsql-hackers
Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me> writes:
> On 9/22/24 17:45, Tom Lane wrote:
>> #define FAST_PATH_GROUP(index)    \
>> -    (AssertMacro(((index) >= 0) && ((index) < FP_LOCK_SLOTS_PER_BACKEND)), \
>> +    (AssertMacro((uint32) (index) < FP_LOCK_SLOTS_PER_BACKEND), \
>> ((index) / FP_LOCK_SLOTS_PER_GROUP))

> For the (x >= 0) asserts, doing it this way relies on negative values
> wrapping to large positive ones, correct? AFAIK it's guaranteed to be a
> very large value, so it can't accidentally be less than the slot count.

Right, any negative value would wrap to something more than
INT32_MAX.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more)
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Add memory/disk usage for WindowAgg nodes in EXPLAIN