Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZR9NiTJ5993+RvLVOaQWhjCGWcq-A2XCQ4SOQFaFEGqwA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with you. Fewer and fewer people are running 32-bit systems > these days, but there must surely be more people running 32-bit > systems than there are running with DEC_DIGITS != 4. I think it's a > stretch to say that DEC_DIGITS != 4 is "supported" in any meaningful > sense, so I don't think de-supporting it is an issue. Of course Andrew's analysis is correct...very few people are building with DEC_DIGITS != 4. Maybe zero. That's beside the point, IMV, which is that it's less invasive to just keep the code the way it is. Desupporting DEC_DIGITS != 4, by making the code break in a general way, without reference to this patch, seems misguided. I would like the build to break in a way that makes the customizer of numeric.c realize that they can disable abbreviation manually too, and still build with DEC_DIGITS != 4. Otherwise, you better remove all the existing specialized DEC_DIGITS != 4 code, of which there is a fair bit. I don't think it makes sense to call that code "historical". -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: