Re: [PATCH] Cleanup of GUC units code

On 9/1/08, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > - In attempt to preserve maximum range of values for INT64_IS_BUSTED
> > systems, the code is written rather non-obvious way.
>
> I do not personally object a bit to making the units comparisons
> case-insensitive (I think it's mainly Peter who wants to be strict
> about it). I don't think there are any other good ideas in this
> patch, however, and exposing ourselves to intermediate overflows in
> the name of simplicity is definitely not one.

For all practical purposes, the overflow is insignificant when int64
works. I'll look if I can avoid it on INT64_IS_BUSTED case.

In the meantime, here is simple patch for case-insensivity.

--
marko