| From: | Tsutomu Yamada <tsutomu(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tsutomu Yamada <tsutomu(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: More portable way to support 64bit platforms |
| Date: | 2009-06-29 10:52:50 |
| Message-ID: | 8301.1246272770@srapc2360.sra.co.jp |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On Friday 26 June 2009 12:07:24 Tsutomu Yamada wrote:
> > Proposal: More portable way to support 64bit platforms
> >
> > Short description:
> >
> > Current PostgreSQL implementation has some portability issues to
> > support 64bit platforms: pointer calculations using long is not
> > portable, for example on Windows x64 platform. We propose to use
> > intptr_t instead of long, which appears in in C99.
>
> This makes sense. You can also review the archives for previous iterations of
> this discussion (search for "intptr_t").
Yes, I have read through the discusion but it seems somewhat faded
out. This is because no platform other than Windows has 64bit
pointer issues IMO. I think using intptr_t is cleaner and will bring
more portability. Moreover it will solve Windows 64bit pointer issues,
I believe.
> You might want to add your patch to the next commit fest.
Yes, I would like to submit patches for the next commit fest.
--
Tsutomu Yamada
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-06-29 12:48:19 | Re: Extensions User Design |
| Previous Message | Bruce YUAN | 2009-06-29 08:53:40 | How to register my function into backend? |