From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | khollis(at)Gawain(dot)Houston-InterWeb(dot)COM (Kenji T(dot) Hollis) |
Cc: | scrappy(at)hub(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] PostGreSQL v6.2.1 for Linux Alpha |
Date: | 1998-02-12 16:50:51 |
Message-ID: | 199802121652.LAA27207@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> Bruce:
>
> > Take a look at utils/hash/hashfn.c:tag_hash. Is there a problem in that
> > code for your platform. Is the hash getting set, or is it falling
> > through the case statements? This code is clearly broken for
> > sizeof(int) > 4, but I think your ints are 4, and longs are 8. I bet
> > somewhere we are using a long where we should be using an int, and that
> > is why only your platform is seeing it. Is this true about long vs.
> > int. I can review our use of longs to see if there are problems.
>
> I created a small program to return the size of values. They are:
>
> Size of short: 2
> Size of char: 1
> Size of int: 4
> Size of long: 8
>
> Does this help?
Yep. Does anyone else run OS's with the size of long greater than int?
Does Dec Unix Alpha? Are people running that?
--
Bruce Momjian
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-02-12 16:51:21 | Re: [HACKERS] PostGreSQL v6.2.1 for Linux Alpha |
Previous Message | Boersenspielteam | 1998-02-12 15:41:45 | Re: [HACKERS] Problem with the numbers I reported yesterday |