Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [HACKERS] Size vs size_t - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Size vs size_t
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZ7F-TeqqstK46+Q2ymgFHB1qx6N6BxRcLRSAw0ZbCjOA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Size vs size_t  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Size vs size_t  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Noticing that the assembled hackers don't seem to agree on $SUBJECT in
> new patches, I decided to plot counts of lines matching \<Size\> and
> \<size_t\> over time.  After a very long run in the lead, size_t has
> recently been left in the dust by Size.

I guess I assumed that we wouldn't have defined PG-specific types if
we wanted to just use the OS-supplied ones.

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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Corey Huinker
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless)
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Re: new set of psql patches for loading (saving) data from (to)text, binary files