Re: int8 sequences --- small implementation problem

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: int8 sequences --- small implementation problem
Дата
Msg-id 17812.997802908@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Surviving transaction-ID wraparound, take 2  (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
"Serguei Mokhov" <sa_mokho@alcor.concordia.ca> writes:
>> This would work, I think, but my goodness it's an ugly solution.

> Is anything wrong with just having two int32 per value for this case?

Well, we do want it to be int64 on machines where int64 is properly
defined.  Or are you suggesting

#ifdef INT64_IS_BUSTEDint32 last_value;int32 pad1;
#elseint64 last_value;
#endif

That does seem marginally more robust, now that you mention it...
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: int8 sequences --- small implementation problem
Следующее
От: Dave Blasby
Дата:
Сообщение: Forcing GiST index to be used