1
0
mirror of https://github.com/postgres/postgres.git synced 2025-11-24 00:23:06 +03:00
Commit Graph

7 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Tom Lane
1f8bc44868 Remove workarounds for avoiding [U]INT64_FORMAT in translatable strings.
Further code simplification along the same lines as d914eb347
and earlier patches.

Aleksander Alekseev, Japin Li

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAJ7c6TMSKi3Xs8h5MP38XOnQQpBLazJvVxVfPn++roitDJcR7g@mail.gmail.com
2022-03-21 11:11:55 -04:00
Bruce Momjian
27b77ecf9f Update copyright for 2022
Backpatch-through: 10
2022-01-07 19:04:57 -05:00
Peter Eisentraut
3c6f8c011f Simplify the general-purpose 64-bit integer parsing APIs
pg_strtouint64() is a wrapper around strtoull/strtoul/_strtoui64, but
it seems no longer necessary to have this indirection.
msvc/Solution.pm claims HAVE_STRTOULL, so the "MSVC only" part seems
unnecessary.  Also, we have code in c.h to substitute alternatives for
strtoull() if not found, and that would appear to cover all currently
supported platforms, so having a further fallback in pg_strtouint64()
seems unnecessary.

Therefore, we could remove pg_strtouint64(), and use strtoull()
directly in all call sites.  However, it seems useful to keep a
separate notation for parsing exactly 64-bit integers, matching the
type definition int64/uint64.  For that, add new macros strtoi64() and
strtou64() in c.h as thin wrappers around strtol()/strtoul() or
strtoll()/stroull().  This makes these functions available everywhere
instead of just in the server code, and it makes the function naming
notably different from the pg_strtointNN() functions in numutils.c,
which have a different API.

Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/a3df47c9-b1b4-29f2-7e91-427baf8b75a3%40enterprisedb.com
2021-12-17 06:32:07 +01:00
Fujii Masao
78aa616be7 Fix typo in comments.
Author: Hou Zhijie
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB5716E6A6535FDFDC5A1B004194CE9@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
2021-09-06 17:03:40 +09:00
Bruce Momjian
ca3b37487b Update copyright for 2021
Backpatch-through: 9.5
2021-01-02 13:06:25 -05:00
Tom Lane
5da14938f7 Rename SLRU structures and associated LWLocks.
Originally, the names assigned to SLRUs had no purpose other than
being shmem lookup keys, so not a lot of thought went into them.
As of v13, though, we're exposing them in the pg_stat_slru view and
the pg_stat_reset_slru function, so it seems advisable to take a bit
more care.  Rename them to names based on the associated on-disk
storage directories (which fortunately we *did* think about, to some
extent; since those are also visible to DBAs, consistency seems like
a good thing).  Also rename the associated LWLocks, since those names
are likewise user-exposed now as wait event names.

For the most part I only touched symbols used in the respective modules'
SimpleLruInit() calls, not the names of other related objects.  This
renaming could have been taken further, and maybe someday we will do so.
But for now it seems undesirable to change the names of any globally
visible functions or structs, so some inconsistency is unavoidable.

(But I *did* terminate "oldserxid" with prejudice, as I found that
name both unreadable and not descriptive of the SLRU's contents.)

Table 27.12 needs re-alphabetization now, but I'll leave that till
after the other LWLock renamings I have in mind.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/28683.1589405363@sss.pgh.pa.us
2020-05-15 14:28:25 -04:00
Thomas Munro
4c04be9b05 Introduce xid8-based functions to replace txid_XXX.
The txid_XXX family of fmgr functions exposes 64 bit transaction IDs to
users as int8.  Now that we have an SQL type xid8 for FullTransactionId,
define a new set of functions including pg_current_xact_id() and
pg_current_snapshot() based on that.  Keep the old functions around too,
for now.

It's a bit sneaky to use the same C functions for both, but since the
binary representation is identical except for the signedness of the
type, and since older functions are the ones using the wrong signedness,
and since we'll presumably drop the older ones after a reasonable period
of time, it seems reasonable to switch to FullTransactionId internally
and share the code for both.

Reviewed-by: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Reviewed-by: Takao Fujii <btfujiitkp@oss.nttdata.com>
Reviewed-by: Yoshikazu Imai <imai.yoshikazu@fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20190725000636.666m5mad25wfbrri%40alap3.anarazel.de
2020-04-07 12:04:32 +12:00