Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris
Date: 2006-10-03 17:28:12
Message-ID: 8388.1159896492@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> Given the time that has been spent working around
> the braindamaged behavior of qsort() on various platforms, I would be
> more inclined to *always* use our qsort() instead of the platform's
> version.

I've been heard to argue against that in the past, but I'm beginning to
see the merit of the idea. One good reason for doing it is that we
could stop worrying about the possibility of large-scale memory leaks
due to erroring out of glibc's qsort --- in particular it would be OK
to add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS into the comparison callback as was
requested recently.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-10-03 17:48:47 Re: src/tools/msvc usage instructions
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2006-10-03 17:21:25 Re: src/tools/msvc usage instructions