Re: Remove one TimestampTzGetDatum call in pg_stat_get_io()

2024-09-06 Thread Bertrand Drouvot
Hi, On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 11:40:56AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > Hmm, TimestampTzGetDatum is not a no-op on 32-bit machines. If you're > > correct about this, why are our 32-bit BF animals not crashing? Are > > we failing to test this code? > > Oh, I had the polarity backwards: this

Re: Remove one TimestampTzGetDatum call in pg_stat_get_io()

2024-09-06 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > Hmm, TimestampTzGetDatum is not a no-op on 32-bit machines. If you're > correct about this, why are our 32-bit BF animals not crashing? Are > we failing to test this code? Oh, I had the polarity backwards: this error doesn't result in trying to dereference something that's not a point

Re: Remove one TimestampTzGetDatum call in pg_stat_get_io()

2024-09-06 Thread Tom Lane
Bertrand Drouvot writes: > While working on the per backend I/O statistics patch ([1]), I noticed that > there is an unnecessary call to TimestampTzGetDatum() in pg_stat_get_io() ( > as the reset_time is already a Datum). Hmm, TimestampTzGetDatum is not a no-op on 32-bit machines. If you're corr