Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2015-03-30 21:50:09 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I'm too fried from the redeye back from pgconf nyc to do anything
>> complicated, but it seems quite possible to define int64/uint64 based
>> the stdint.h types if available. And generally a good idea too. I guess
>> I'll try that tomorrow; unless Andrew beats me to it.
> It's possible to do that, but it's not as trivial as I'd hoped. For one
> we'd need to include stdint.h in some places we don't today
> (postgres_ext.h), for another we'd need some uglyness to determine the
> correct printf modifier for int64_t (can't use PRId64 etc afaics).
Yeah, I thought the printf strings would be the sticking point :-(
> I'm tempted to just prefix our limits with PG_ and define them
> unconditionally, including appropriate casts to our types.
I don't have a better idea.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
