Re: uintptr_t for Datum

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: uintptr_t for Datum
Date: 2009-12-31 18:44:32
Message-ID: 200912311844.nBVIiWn18036@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> BTW, it looks like the patch is showing a manual change to
> >> pg_config.h.in. Don't do that. Run autoheader.
>
> > I wasn't aware autoheader existed. Is that new or has it alwasy been
> > part of autoconf?
>
> It's always been there, or at least for many years. pg_config.h.in
> really ought to be thought of the same as configure: you don't edit
> it, you just generate it.

Well, that's pretty confusing considering it has a .in suffix, just like
configure.in, which we do edit, but I get your point.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2009-12-31 18:56:05 Re: Thoughts on statistics for continuously advancing columns
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2009-12-31 18:43:05 Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking