From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 64 bit numbers vs format strings |
Date: | 2025-03-29 17:24:26 |
Message-ID: | 467967df-5536-4d7e-acd2-84326ca1f59f@eisentraut.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10.03.25 10:49, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 02.03.25 22:08, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 6:21 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
>> wrote:
>>> On 05.12.24 23:18, Thomas Munro wrote:
>>>> Old: errmsg("hello %llu", (unsigned long long) x)
>>>> New: errmsg("hello %" PRIu64, x)
>>>
>>> I have committed the subset of this patch for pg_checksums.c so that the
>>> translators and whoever else might be affected can try this out at small
>>> scale. (I don't expect any particular problems.) Then we can move on
>>> to the rest in a few weeks, I think.
>>
>> Good plan, thanks. Here's a rebase.
>
> I think this went ok, and we can proceed here.
>
> I looked through the v2-0001 patch in detail. Most of it is mechanical,
> so no problems. I couple of issues you already mentioned:
I have committed v2-0001, omitting the parts that I had flagged in my
review. I have also committed v2-0002. From my perspective, this can
conclude this thread.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rafael Thofehrn Castro | 2025-03-29 17:51:20 | Re: Proposal: Progressive explain |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-03-29 17:17:44 | Re: pg_stat_database.checksum_failures vs shared relations |