Re: libpq debug log

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "'alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org'" <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: "iwata(dot)aya(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <iwata(dot)aya(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "'Kyotaro Horiguchi'" <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: libpq debug log
Date: 2021-04-01 14:49:59
Message-ID: 3407933.1617288599@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

BTW, what in the world is this supposed to accomplish?

- (long long) rows_to_send);
+ (1L << 62) + (long long) rows_to_send);

Various buildfarm members are complaining that the shift distance
is more than the width of "long", which I'd just fix with s/L/LL/
except that the addition of the constant seems just wrong to
begin with.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2021-04-01 14:56:02 Re: ModifyTable overheads in generic plans
Previous Message Arne Roland 2021-04-01 14:38:59 Re: Rename of triggers for partitioned tables