| From: | Manfred Spraul <manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>, "''''pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org' ' ' '" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question |
| Date: | 2004-01-13 17:08:27 |
| Message-ID: | 4004260B.6060704@colorfullife.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>Manfred Spraul <manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com> writes:
>
>
>>What are the chances for Win64 support? sizeof(unsigned long) remains 4,
>>sizeof(void*) is 8.
>>
>>
>
>If you can tell me what type Datum should be (unsigned long long
>maybe?), we could probably handle that.
>
Probably uintptr_t: That's the official C99 integer type for storing
pointers. I'm not sure if it's guaranteed to be wide enough for
ULONG_MAX (or only UINT_MAX).
--
Manfred
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-01-13 17:37:21 | Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question |
| Previous Message | Mark Cave-Ayland | 2004-01-13 17:08:21 | Re: Suggestions for analyze patch required... |