Re: Cannot find a working 64-bit integer type on Illumos

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Cannot find a working 64-bit integer type on Illumos
Date: 2024-12-05 01:25:14
Message-ID: 2427743.1733361914@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> If someone wants to define things like that before potentially
> including system headers, they're not going about it the right way if
> they're including our headers first (or anything at all not under
> their direct control). But OK, I can work with the
> not-broken-so-don't-fix-it and
> pulling-in-more-stuff-that-maybe-they-don't-want arguments. :-)

v2 LGTM.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiro Ikeda 2024-12-05 01:39:22 Re: Doc: clarify the log message level of the VERBOSE option
Previous Message Peter Smith 2024-12-05 01:13:40 Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation