> Tom, Kaigai, > >> Kohei KaiGai <kai...@kaigai.gr.jp> writes: >>> Tom, could you give us a suggestion which manner is better approach; whether >>> the PQfn should have responsibility for endian translation of >>> 64bit-integer, or >>> callers (lo_tell64 or lo_seek64)? >> >> Adding anything inside pqFunctionCall is useless, unless we were to add >> an int64 variant to PQArgBlock, which isn't a good idea because it will >> be an ABI break. The functions in fe-lobj.c have to set up the int64 >> value as if it were pass-by-reference, which means dealing with >> endianness concerns there. > > I just want to make sure you guy's point. > > We do not modify pqFunctionCall. That means PQfn does not accept > PQArgBlock.isint != 0 and PQArgBlock.len == 8 case. If a PQfn caller > wants to send 64-bit integer, it should set PQArgBlock.isint = 0 and > PQArgBlock.len = 8 and set data pass-by-reference. Endianness should > be taken care by the PQfn caller. Also we do not modify fe-misc.c > because there's no point to add pqPutint64/pqGetint64(they are called > from pqFunctionCall in the patch).
Oops. There's no such a function pqGetint64 in the patch. 64-bit int case is taken care inside pqGetint. -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
