Re: Add %z support to elog/ereport?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Add %z support to elog/ereport?
Date: 2014-01-17 19:18:55
Message-ID: 9400.1389986335@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> Meh. This isn't needed if we do what I suggest above, but in any case
> I don't approve of removing the existing [U]INT64_FORMAT macros.
> That breaks code that doesn't need to get broken, probably including
> third-party modules.

After looking more closely I see you didn't actually *remove* those
macros, just define them in a different place/way. So the above objection
is just noise, sorry. (Though I think it'd be notationally cleaner to let
configure continue to define the macros; it doesn't need to do anything as
ugly as CppAsString2() to concatenate...)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2014-01-17 19:26:39 Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-01-17 19:06:19 Re: currawong is not a happy animal