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

Re: Database file compatability

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Database file compatability
Date: 2005-09-28 03:27:52
Message-ID: 1223.1127878072@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> writes:
> I think all ALIGNOF macros should be checked.

There are no platforms for which ALIGNOF_SHORT is different from 2.
I don't think there are any platforms we care about where ALIGNOF_INT
is different from 4.  The cases of interest are ALIGNOF_DOUBLE,
ALIGNOF_LONG, ALIGNOF_LONG_LONG_INT (note that MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF is
just the largest of these).  In practice "long int" is the same type
as either "int" or "long long int", so ALIGNOF_LONG isn't a distinct
case either.  What it comes down to is that MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF is
sufficient to tell the difference between the platforms we need to
deal with.  If you have a counterexample, tell us about it.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-09-28 03:48:56
Subject: Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems
Previous:From: Chris BrowneDate: 2005-09-28 03:22:12
Subject: Re: State of support for back PG branches

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