Re: Use of "long" in incremental sort code

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Use of "long" in incremental sort code
Date: 2020-07-31 02:11:46
Message-ID: CAApHDvqa=jgh5hsL+0nrG3fb348_fujVmq-P2RzXOk3ub8gpcQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 07:47, James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Patch using int64 attached.

I added this to the open items list for PG13.

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Markman 2020-07-31 02:25:46 Re: windows config.pl question
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-07-31 01:59:53 Re: windows config.pl question