Tom Lane wrote: > Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > When talking of near-current systems with 64 bit off_t you are not > > going to find one without support for 64 bit integral types. > > I tend to agree with Giles on this point. A non-integral representation > of off_t is theoretically possible but I don't believe it exists in > practice. Before going far out of our way to allow it, we should first > require some evidence that it's needed on a supported or > likely-to-be-supported platform. > > time_t isn't guaranteed to be an integral type either if you read the > oldest docs about it ... but no one believes that in practice ...
I think fpos_t is the non-integral one. I thought off_t almost always was integral. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
