| From: | Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Giles Lean <giles(at)nemeton(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem? |
| Date: | 2002-10-21 14:10:22 |
| Message-ID: | 5.1.0.14.0.20021022000610.044e2fd8@mail.rhyme.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At 09:47 AM 21/10/2002 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>Well, the main problem with that is there's no such symbol as
>__BYTE_ORDER ...
What about just:
int i = 256;
then checking the first byte? This should give me the endianness, and makes
a non-destructive write (not sure it it's important). Currently the
commonly used code does not rely on off_t arithmetic, so if possible I'd
like to avoid shift. Does that sound reasonable? Or overly cautious?
----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-21 14:16:11 | Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem? |
| Previous Message | Michael Meskes | 2002-10-21 13:59:12 | ECPG |