Re: 64-bit API for large object

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, anzai(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp, nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp
Subject: Re: 64-bit API for large object
Date: 2012-09-21 16:16:36
Message-ID: 21403.1348244196@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> writes:
> Tom, could you give us a suggestion which manner is better approach; whether
> the PQfn should have responsibility for endian translation of 64bit-integer, or
> callers (lo_tell64 or lo_seek64)?

Adding anything inside pqFunctionCall is useless, unless we were to add
an int64 variant to PQArgBlock, which isn't a good idea because it will
be an ABI break. The functions in fe-lobj.c have to set up the int64
value as if it were pass-by-reference, which means dealing with
endianness concerns there.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-09-21 17:12:09 Re: Confusing EXPLAIN output in case of inherited tables
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2012-09-21 16:15:25 Re: DB & Schema