Re: [HACKERS] int8 type -- call for porting results!

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu (Thomas G(dot) Lockhart)
Cc: hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] int8 type -- call for porting results!
Date: 1998-08-16 15:03:36
Message-ID: 5225.903279816@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>> I wonder if we can try enabling int8's for all gcc compilers? The only
>> machines that might break on are other 64-bit machines (like some
>> SGI's?).

> Yep, should work.

Autoconf, my boys, think autoconf. This sort of guess-and-hope
configuration is exactly what autoconf was invented to prevent.

I'll gin up a few lines of autoconf test code and send them in.
I'd suggest we say that the autoconf test will deliver the
following symbols in config.h:

HAVE_LONG_INT_64 # defined if "long int" works and is 8 bytes
HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 # defined if "long long int" works and is 8 bytes

Are there any other possibilities to worry about?

How hard should the test code try to make sure that int64 actually
works? Judging from Tom's comments, we'd better try a multiply and
a divide at least.

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1998-08-16 15:30:56 Re: [HACKERS] Psql doesn't allow multiple action rules
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-08-16 14:34:02 What I'm working on