Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYpo97KWQNtPwr5Uoke1UpMfiqJNMfzgjL07Z=x_Y53hQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 11:53 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Yury Zhuravlev
> <u.zhuravlev@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>> I've just run into a problem with these macro. Function ginStepRight breaks
>> completely when compiled using the MSVC2013 and MSVC2015 (since these
>> releases use C99's bools but without stdbool.h like C++).
>> I don't understand why the patch has not been commited yet. It seems to me
>> not so important !! or ! = 0, the solution is all that matters.
>
> +1 for applying it. There were some conflicts in gist and lwlock, that
> I fixed as per the attached. I have added as well an entry in next CF:
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/507/
> If a committer wants to pick up that before, feel free. For now it
> won't fall in the void, that's better than nothing.

Not actually attached.

Are we thinking to back-patch this?  I would be disinclined to
back-patch widespread changes like this.  If there's a specific
instance related to Gin where this is causing a tangible problem, we
could back-patch just that part, with a clear description of that
problem.  Otherwise, I think this should be master-only.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Artur Zakirov
Date:
Subject: Re: Fuzzy substring searching with the pg_trgm extension
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers