Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: int8 & INT64_IS_BUSTED

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
Cc: Postgresql-Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: int8 & INT64_IS_BUSTED
Date: 2007-08-29 22:22:11
Message-ID: 1188426131.32003.30.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 22:41 +0200, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
> Or are platforms with INT64_IS_BUSTED no longer supported,
> and are all those #ifdefs only legacy code?

Personally I think we should head in that direction: if we enable
integer datetimes by default in 8.4 (per earlier discussion), such
machines will be more broken still. We could fallback to using FP
datetimes on INT64_IS_BUSTED machines, but IMHO it is just fundamentally
unwise to have the behavior of a builtin data type dependent on this
sort of thing.

> Please enlighten a poor linux+gcc user who can't remember
> ever using a compiler without a "long long" datatype after
> leaving TurboC under DOS.

I'm not aware of any platform we might conceivably care about that
doesn't have a 64-bit integral type. To verify this, Peter E. suggested
that we emit a build-time warning if compiling on such a platform for
8.3, which I think would be worth doing.

-Neil



In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-08-29 22:23:41
Subject: Re: reindexdb hangs
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-08-29 22:18:03
Subject: Re: Representation of ResourceOwnerIds (transient XIDs) in system views (lazy xid assignment)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group