| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Improper use about DatumGetInt32 |
| Date: | 2020-09-21 18:08:22 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYMP0PxbyAwYTunXuxTCS16=92+=cou8FpgJQuxpcGV2A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 9:17 PM Hou, Zhijie <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> In (/contrib/bloom/blutils.c:277), I found it use DatumGetInt32 to get UInt32 type.
> Is it more appropriate to use DatumGetUInt32 here?
Typically, the DatumGetBlah() function that you pick should match the
SQL data type that the function is returning. So if the function
returns pg_catalog.int4, which corresponds to the C data type int32,
you would use DatumGetInt32. There is no SQL type corresponding to the
C data type uint32, so I'm not sure why we even have DatumGetUInt32.
I'm sort of suspicious that there's some fuzzy thinking going on
there.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2020-09-21 18:14:03 | Re: pgindent vs dtrace on macos |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2020-09-21 18:04:33 | Re: recovering from "found xmin ... from before relfrozenxid ..." |