Re: PostgreSQL pre-7.1 Linux/Alpha Status... - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PostgreSQL pre-7.1 Linux/Alpha Status...
Date
Msg-id 18463.977421395@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL pre-7.1 Linux/Alpha Status...  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL pre-7.1 Linux/Alpha Status...  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>         if (sizeof(unsigned long) > sizeof(Oid) && cvt > UINT_MAX)

Hm.  Each part of that will generate "expression is always false"
warnings from certain overprotective compilers.  A more serious problem
is that using UINT_MAX assumes that Oid is unsigned int, which will
certainly not be true forever --- but the required change will be easily
missed when Oid changes.

Perhaps postgres_ext.h could define
#define OID_MAX  UINT_MAX

right below the typedef for Oid, and then we could do this in oidin():
#if OID_MAX < ULONG_MAX    if (cvt > OID_MAX)        elog();#endif

I think this #if expression will work --- anyone see any portability
risk there?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Rod Taylor"
Date:
Subject: Inline Comments for pg_dump
Next
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: Who is a maintainer of GiST code ?