| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca" <movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string |
| Date: | 2020-03-26 14:08:38 |
| Message-ID: | 11357.1585231718@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 at 08:18, movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca <movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca>
> wrote:
>> if we change return type of all those functions to int64, we won't need
>> this cast.
>> I change the 'encode' function, it needs an int64 return type, but keep
>> other
>> functions in 'pg_encoding', because I think it of no necessary reason.
> Ok, let's leave it for a committer to decide.
If I'm grasping the purpose of these correctly, wouldn't Size or size_t
be a more appropriate type? And I definitely agree with changing all
of these APIs at once, if they're all dealing with the same kind of
value.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2020-03-26 14:12:02 | Re: pg_checksums in backend/storage/page/README |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2020-03-26 14:06:34 | Re: pg_checksums in backend/storage/page/README |