On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Jeevan Chalke wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada.m...@gmail.com> >> wrote: > >> > And the line number should be switched to 1 when line number has >> > reached to INT_MAX? >> >> Yes, when it goes beyond INT_MAX, wrap around to 1. >> >> BTW, I wonder, can't we simply use unsigned int instead? > > That was my thought also: let the variable be unsigned, and have it wrap > around normally. So once you reach UINT_MAX, the next line number is > zero (instead of getting stuck at UINT_MAX, which would be rather > strange). Anyway I don't think anyone is going to reach the UINT_MAX > limit ... I mean that would be one hell of a query, wouldn't it. If > your query is upwards of a million lines, surely you are in deep trouble > already. > > Does your text editor handle files longer than 4 billion lines? >
As you said, if line number reached UINT_MAX then I think that this case is too strange. I think INT_MAX is enough for line number. The v5 patch which Jeevan is created seems to good. But one point, I got hunk when patch is applied to HEAD. (doc file) So I have revised it and attached. Regards, ------- Sawada Masahiko
psql-line-number_v5.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
