Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules
Date: 2006-05-08 14:18:00
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patches
> > it's considered the linker's job to prevent loading 32-bit 
> code into a 
> > 64-bit executable or vice versa, so I don't think we need to be 
> > checking for common assumptions about sizeof(long).
> I know ELF headers contain some of this info, and unix in 
> general doesn't try to allow different bit sizes in one 
> binary. Windows used to (maybe still has) a mechanism to 
> allow 32-bit code to call 16-bit libraries. Do they allow the 
> same for 64-bit libs?

Yes, but it's not something that it does automatically - you have to
specifically seti t up to call the thunking code. It's not something I
think we need to support at all. (Performance is also quite horrible -
at least on 16 vs 32, I'd assume the same for 32 vs 64)


pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-05-08 14:18:19
Subject: Re: Page at a time index scan
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-05-08 14:13:45
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group