pg_attribute typo??

From: Keith Parks <emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us
Cc: hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: pg_attribute typo??
Date: 1998-08-26 19:27:54
Message-ID: 199808261927.UAA03548@mtcc.demon.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce,

Just noticed the following warning when compiling for the
umpteenth time ;-)

gcc -I../../../include -I../../../backend -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -g
-I../.. -c relcache.c -o relcache.o
relcache.c:110: warning: multi-character character constant
relcache.c:110: warning: overflow in implicit constant conversion

Upon investigation I find what should be a 'd' was a 'd '

Here's a patch.

Keith.

*** ./src/include/catalog/pg_attribute.h.orig Wed Aug 26 19:19:35 1998
--- ./src/include/catalog/pg_attribute.h Wed Aug 26 19:20:26 1998
***************
*** 317,323 ****
*/
#define Schema_pg_attribute \
{ 1249, {"attrelid"}, 26, 0, 4, 1, 0, -1, -1, '\001', '\0', 'i',
'\0', '\0' }, \
! { 1249, {"attname"}, 19, 0, NAMEDATALEN, 2, 0, -1, -1, '\0', '\0', 'd ',
'\0', '\0' }, \
{ 1249, {"atttypid"}, 26, 0, 4, 3, 0, -1, -1, '\001', '\0', 'i',
'\0', '\0' }, \
{ 1249, {"attdisbursion"}, 700, 0, 4, 4, 0, -1, -1, '\0', '\0', 'i',
'\0', '\0' }, \
{ 1249, {"attlen"}, 21, 0, 2, 5, 0, -1, -1, '\001',
'\0', 's', '\0', '\0' }, \
--- 317,323 ----
*/
#define Schema_pg_attribute \
{ 1249, {"attrelid"}, 26, 0, 4, 1, 0, -1, -1, '\001', '\0', 'i',
'\0', '\0' }, \
! { 1249, {"attname"}, 19, 0, NAMEDATALEN, 2, 0, -1, -1, '\0', '\0', 'd',
'\0', '\0' }, \
{ 1249, {"atttypid"}, 26, 0, 4, 3, 0, -1, -1, '\001', '\0', 'i',
'\0', '\0' }, \
{ 1249, {"attdisbursion"}, 700, 0, 4, 4, 0, -1, -1, '\0', '\0', 'i',
'\0', '\0' }, \
{ 1249, {"attlen"}, 21, 0, 2, 5, 0, -1, -1, '\001',
'\0', 's', '\0', '\0' }, \

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Ivar Helbekkmo 1998-08-26 20:46:38 Re: [HACKERS] vacuum problem
Previous Message David Hartwig 1998-08-26 19:04:09 Re: [HACKERS] Regression test status (was type coersion)