On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 5:30 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 01:54:00PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > I ran some tests on my dev system [1] and I don't see much difference
> > between v3 and v4. So, +1 for v3 patch (+ argument order swap) from
> > Andres to keep the code simple and elegant.
>
> This thread has stalled for a couple of weeks, so I have gone back to
> it. Testing on a tmpfs I am not seeing a difference if performance
> for any of the approaches discussed. At the end, as I am the one
> behind the introduction of pg_pwrite_zeros(), I have applied v3 after
> switches the size and offset parameters to be the same way as in v4.
Apparently ye olde GCC 4.7 on "lapwing" doesn't like the way you
initialised that struct. I guess it wants {{0}} instead of {0}.
Apparently old GCC was wrong about that warning[1], but that system
doesn't have the back-patched fixes? Not sure.
[1]
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63355760/how-standard-is-the-0-initializer-in-c89
