Excerpts from Kohei KaiGai's message of jue sep 27 01:01:18 -0300 2012:
> * I have a question. What is the meaning of INT64_IS_BUSTED?
> It seems to me a marker to indicate a platform without 64bit support.
> However, the commit 901be0fad4034c9cf8a3588fd6cf2ece82e4b8ce
> says as follows:
> | Remove all the special-case code for INT64_IS_BUSTED, per decision that
> | we're not going to support that anymore.
Yeah, I think we should just get rid of those bits. I don't remember
seeing *any* complaint when INT64_IS_BUSTED was removed, which means
nobody was using that code anyway.
Now there is one more problem in this area which is that the patch
defined a new type pg_int64 for frontend code (postgres_ext.h). This
seems a bad idea to me. We already have int64 defined in c.h. Should
we expose int64 to postgres_ext.h somehow? Should we use standard-
mandated int64_t instead? One way would be to have a new configure
check for int64_t, and if that type doesn't exist, then just don't
provide the 64 bit functionality to frontend.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
