| From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql(at)rkirkpat(dot)net, pgsql-ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for port testing on fmgr changes -- Results! |
| Date: | 2000-06-25 04:36:13 |
| Message-ID: | 39558C3D.531CE848@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports |
> Hmm, that makes all kinds of sense if time_t is not the same size as
> AbsoluteTime --- which wouldn't surprise me at all on a 64-bit system.
> time_t *ought* to be 64-bits on such a machine. The casts in that
> routine,
> tx = localtime((time_t *) &time);
> are obviously bogus if so. Can anyone with an Alpha comment?
I haven't had an Alpha for a couple of years, but I *strongly* recall
that time_t is 64 bits on that machine.
- Thomas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-06-25 04:55:08 | Re: SQL_TEXT (Re: Re: Big 7.1 open items) |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-06-25 04:31:45 | Re: About the pid and opts files |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adriaan Joubert | 2000-06-25 07:17:52 | Re: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for port testing on fmgr changes -- Results! |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-06-25 04:15:44 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for port testing on fmgr changes -- Results! |