Re: [oauth] Stabilize the libpq-oauth ABI (and allow alternative implementations?)

From: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>
To: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [oauth] Stabilize the libpq-oauth ABI (and allow alternative implementations?)
Date: 2026-03-10 22:10:29
Message-ID: CAN4CZFOhtfezJPXAmzWwSOAR0parDxDP_vy5jUDBy1YD1S33CA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

1-4 looks good to me, with one question:

+#define MASK_BITS ((uintptr_t) 0x55aa55aa55aa55aa)

Won't this cause a warning in 32 bit builds? (0x55aa55aa definitely
should work in both?)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2026-03-10 22:10:38 Re: Refactor recovery conflict signaling a little
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2026-03-10 22:09:14 Re: Fix uninitialized xl_running_xacts padding