Re: 64-bit integers for GUC

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 64-bit integers for GUC
Date: 2006-07-25 12:15:55
Message-ID: 8370.1153829755@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> ISTM that before long someone will want to use more than 2 GB for work_mem.
> Currently, you can't set more because it overflows the variable.

Yes you can, because the value is measured in KB.

Now, if you were to redefine it as being measured in bytes, you would
have a backlash, because people already are using values above 2GB.

> I'm not sure a wholesale switch of GUC integers to 64 bit is the
> solution.

I'd be fairly worried about whether that wouldn't mean we fail
completely on INT64_IS_BROKEN platforms ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-07-25 12:26:28 Re: root/administartor user check option.
Previous Message Gevik Babakhani 2006-07-25 12:11:38 Re: root/administartor user check option.