From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Clarification suggestion for 46.4 chapter. |
Date: | 2012-09-01 16:05:24 |
Message-ID: | 20120901160523.GD2969@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:54:54AM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 17.08.2012 05:07, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 02:53:22PM +0300, Dmitriy Igrishin wrote:
> >>Hey,
> >>
> >>The section 46.4 describes the base data types used in messages.
> >>http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/protocol-message-types.html
> >>
> >>According to section 46.5
> >>http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/protocol-message-formats.html
> >>there are cases when Int32 can be negative (e.g. see DataRow(B) message
> >>description.)
> >>
> >>Thus, I would like to suggest to change the description of Int(i)
> >>from
> >>"An n-bit integer in network byte order ..."
> >>to
> >>"An n-bit signed integer in network byte order ..."
> >
> >OK, documentation updated.
>
> Actually, in some cases the integers are signed, and in others
> unsigned. For example, in a Bind('F') message, the number of
> parameters is an Int16 according to the docs, but it is treated as
> unsigned. The maximum number of parameters is 65535.
>
> The sentence used to be factually correct, when it didn't mention
> whether they're signed or unsigned. If we want to do better than
> that, we'd need to go through all the mentions of IntN in the docs
> and explicitly say which ones are signed and which ones unsigned.
> Perhaps use Uint16 or Uint32 for the unsigned ones.
I have reverted the patch until someone is able to correctly designate
the values. Thanks.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Kupershmidt | 2012-09-04 23:22:13 | Re: [DOCS] Confusion over "This page in other versions" links |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-09-01 15:58:52 | Re: [DOCS] Confusion over "This page in other versions" links |