Re: Making aggregate deserialization (and WAL receive) functions slightly faster - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Making aggregate deserialization (and WAL receive) functions slightly faster
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvps5q4+CoJawcPr=jm0WmsJRWTRZXMS8UVcrepcwYAG3Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Making aggregate deserialization (and WAL receive) functions slightly faster  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Making aggregate deserialization (and WAL receive) functions slightly faster
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 05:56, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> * in initStringInfoFromString, str->maxlen must be set to len+1 not len
>
> * comment in exec_bind_message doesn't look like pgindent will like it
>
> * same in record_recv, plus it has a misspelling "Initalize"
>
> * in stringinfo.c, inclusion of pg_bitutils.h seems no longer needed

Thank you for looking again. I've addressed all of these in the attached.

> I guess the next question is whether we want to stop here or
> try to relax the requirement about NUL-termination.  I'd be inclined
> to call that a separate issue deserving a separate commit, so maybe
> we should go ahead and commit this much anyway.

I am keen to see this relaxed. I agree that a separate effort is best.

David

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: serial and partitioned table
Next
From: Dmitry Dolgov
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions