| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker ) |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing "long int"-related limit on hash table sizes |
| Date: | 2021-07-26 20:27:05 |
| Message-ID: | 214170.1627331225@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org (Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?=) writes:
> We also have the (U)INT64CONST() macros, which are about about two
> thirds as common as the U?LL? suffixes.
Yeah. Ideally we'd forbid direct use of the suffixes and insist
you go through those macros, but I don't know of any way that
we could enforce such a coding rule, short of grepping the tree
periodically.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2021-07-26 20:27:21 | Re: log_checkpoint's "WAL file(s) added" is misleading to the point of uselessness |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-07-26 20:25:29 | Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers) |