Re: Isn't HANDLE 64 bits on Win64?

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Isn't HANDLE 64 bits on Win64?
Date: 2010-11-16 10:01:34
Message-ID: AANLkTi=KHxn_Ty7vqVMtCjtvG39N8y=+=js84wnqOogw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 01:35, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> ... and if so, isn't postmaster.c's code to transfer a HANDLE value to a
> child process all wet?

It is definitely 64-bit. sizeof(HANDLE)==8.

So yes, it looks completely broken. I guess Windows doesn't actually
*assign* you a handle larger than 2^32 until you actually ahve that
many open handles. Typical values on my test system (win64) comes out
at around 4000 in all tests.

> BTW, it seems like it'd be a good thing if we had a Win64 machine in the
> buildfarm.

Yes. I actually thought we had one. Dave, weren't you going to set one up?

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2010-11-16 10:25:02 Re: Isn't HANDLE 64 bits on Win64?
Previous Message Shigeru HANADA 2010-11-16 09:36:02 Re: SQL/MED estimated time of arrival?