Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jonathan Allen <jallen(at)americansavingslife(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT
Date: 2018-02-26 18:40:57
Message-ID: 30447.1519670457@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Jonathan Allen <jallen(at)americansavingslife(dot)com> writes:
> Right now I'm using a custom build of ecpg to enable Bigint support, but it would suuuuure be nice to have that working in the next release of postgres. I agree, all that's missing is the #define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT 1 line. :)

I'm afraid to push this in today, because today is a release wrap day,
and there's no time to recover if it turns out that we tickle some
portability issue. But I think we should fix it as soon as the release
dust settles.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2018-02-26 20:25:55 Re: BUG #15091: to_number() returns incorrect value
Previous Message Michael Aiello 2018-02-26 18:39:53 RE: BUG #15091: to_number() returns incorrect value