Re: MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF on Windows-32
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF on Windows-32 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 25805.1185204540@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF on Windows-32 (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF on Windows-32
Re: MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF on Windows-32 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Somebody had better double-check that. We don't need to be >> "pessimistic", we need to be *correct*, because the align values had >> better match the way the compiler will lay out a C struct. Otherwise >> struct-based access to catalog rows will fail. (I'm not sure if there >> are any system catalogs with float8 or int64 columns, but I'd sure not >> want to find out that we couldn't have one because of misconfiguration >> of MSVC builds.) > How do I double-check this? The configure script checks it by declaring struct { char pad; TYPE field;} foo and then measuring offsetof(foo, field), for each interesting TYPE. >> I see though that the comment in pg_config.h.win32 claims it was derived >> from mechanically-generated configure output, so unless that's lying >> it should be OK already. > It's not - it started out as a copy of the output of ./configure on mingw. "Started out as"? Good luck keeping it in sync, if it's not mechanically created. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: