Re: PostgreSQL pre-7.1 Linux/Alpha Status...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Ryan Kirkpatrick <pgsql(at)rkirkpat(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-ports(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL pre-7.1 Linux/Alpha Status...
Date: 2000-12-21 17:56:35
Message-ID: 18463.977421395@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> if (sizeof(unsigned long) > sizeof(Oid) && cvt > UINT_MAX)

Hm. Each part of that will generate "expression is always false"
warnings from certain overprotective compilers. A more serious problem
is that using UINT_MAX assumes that Oid is unsigned int, which will
certainly not be true forever --- but the required change will be easily
missed when Oid changes.

Perhaps postgres_ext.h could define

#define OID_MAX UINT_MAX

right below the typedef for Oid, and then we could do this in oidin():

#if OID_MAX < ULONG_MAX
if (cvt > OID_MAX)
elog();
#endif

I think this #if expression will work --- anyone see any portability
risk there?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-12-21 18:09:38 Re: Re: equal operator for _int4 (array of int4)
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2000-12-21 17:33:10 Inline Comments for pg_dump

Browse pgsql-ports by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-12-21 18:41:41 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL pre-7.1 Linux/Alpha Status...
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-12-21 17:29:20 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL pre-7.1 Linux/Alpha Status...