Re: contrib/intarray/_int_gist.c
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: contrib/intarray/_int_gist.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 641.1144250352@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: contrib/intarray/_int_gist.c ("Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: contrib/intarray/_int_gist.c
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
"Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu> writes: > AFAICS, int32 and int are exactly the same thing in PostgreSQL. For the > machine int is not 32 bits long, PostgreSQL won't even run. Ideally we should operate correctly if "int" is 64 bits. In practice I agree that making contrib work would be mighty far down the list of things to fix... It appears to me that the current de-facto standard for C on 64-bit machines is char 8 bits short 16 bits int 32 bits long 64 bits Promoting "int" to 64 bits has a big problem: you have to drop one of the widths entirely, because there is no other basic type allowed by C. (int16_t and the others are only typedefs not new basic types.) So I'm not really expecting to see int = 64 bits any time soon. As for the other direction (int = 16 bits), there's no real hope of running Postgres on a 16-bit machine anyway :-( regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: