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

Re: [PATCH] Cleanup of GUC units code

From: "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cleanup of GUC units code
Date: 2008-09-01 13:37:58
Message-ID: e51f66da0809010637r182327acx7c637c4cd9d3e4e5@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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

Attachment: units.nocase.diff
Description: text/x-diff (2.5 KB)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2008-09-01 13:49:22
Subject: Re: Extending grant insert on tables to sequences
Previous:From: Marko KreenDate: 2008-09-01 13:33:53
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make gram.y use palloc/pfree for memory management

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