Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric

On 02/04/15 22:22, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 02/04/15 21:21, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think this is really nice work, so I have committed this version.  I
>>>> made a few fairly minor changes, hopefully without breaking anything
>>>> in the process:
>>>>
>>>> - I adjusted things for recent commits around INT{32,63}_{MIN_MAX}.
>>>> - I removed (void) ssup; which I do not think is normal PostgreSQL style.
>>>> - Removed the #if DEC_DIGITS != 4 check.  The comment is great, but I
>>>> think we don't need protect against #if 0 code get re-enabled.
>>>> - I removed the too-clever (at least IMHO) handing of TRACE_SORT in
>>>> favor of just using #ifdef around each occurrence.
>>>> - I also declared trace_sort in guc.h, where various other GUCs are
>>>> declared, instead of declaring it privately in each file that needed
>>>> it.
>>>> - Changed some definitions to depend on SIZEOF_DATUM rather than
>>>> USE_FLOAT8_BYVAL.  Hopefully I didn't muff this; please check it.
>>>> - Fixed an OID conflict.
>>>> - And of course, bumped catversion.
>>>
>>>
>>> And that's broken the buildfarm.  Argh.
>>
>> That's because of this:
>>
>> +#ifdef SIZEOF_DATUM == 8
>>
>> You need just #if there.
>
> Thanks.  I actually pushed a fix for that about 25 minutes ago;
> hopefully that is all that is needed.
>

Ok, the git.pg.org was somewhat behind. It did fix it for me when I 
tested it locally.

--  Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services