From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tsutomu Yamada <tsutomu(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: More portable way to support 64bit platforms |
Date: | 2009-06-29 14:40:08 |
Message-ID: | 200906291740.08294.peter_e@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Monday 29 June 2009 17:20:09 Tom Lane wrote:
> The problem with this is that it's barely the tip of the iceberg.
> One point I recall is that there are lots of places where "%lu" is
> assumed to be the correct format to print Datums with.
Hmm. I tried this out. typedef Datum to be long long int on a 32-bit
platform and compile. You get lots of warnings, but none about a format
problem. But if you explicitly insert a call like elog(INFO "datum is %lu",
somedatum), then you see a warning. So this problem might not be very
widespread.
> If it were
> actually possible to support Win64 with only a couple of dozen lines
> of changes, we would have done it long since.
Possibly, or everyone was too confused and didn't know where to start.
I think this proposed change is a step in the right direction, and it doesn't
make things worse for anyone else.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-29 14:52:59 | Re: Proposal: More portable way to support 64bit platforms |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-29 14:26:56 | Re: [PATCH] user mapping extension to pg_ident.conf |