Re: Fix pgstatindex using for large indexes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, Tatsuhito Kasahara <kasahara(dot)tatsuhito(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fix pgstatindex using for large indexes
Date: 2008-02-25 16:50:11
Message-ID: 28246.1203958211@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Is there any currently supported platform which
>>> does not have uint64?
>>
>> I don't know, and neither do you.

> Maybe we should look at some reasonable way of getting the info out of a
> compiled instance. How about if we get pg_config to output the value of
> INT64_IS_BUSTED?

We know all the buildfarm machines have working int64, because they'd
fail the bigint regression test if not. That's not the point here.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2008-02-25 17:21:31 Re: Fix pgstatindex using for large indexes
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2008-02-25 16:41:44 Re: Fix pgstatindex using for large indexes