Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins
Date
Msg-id 199903241621.LAA09354@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins
List pgsql-hackers
> My guess is that either a struct field is being declared "long" when
> it really oughta be "int", or some part of the tuple storage routines
> is applying LONGALIGN() when it only oughta apply INTALIGN().  This
> is something that would be difficult to track down or verify without
> a box on which sizeof(int) != sizeof(long), so I haven't gone after it.
> If you have time, please leave memutils.h with the more reasonable
> looking definition of LONGALIGN() and go looking to find out which
> system table has the sizing conflict.

Yes.  If you can tell us the column, by running initdb in debug mode
(somehow), I think we can figure out the problem.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] backend unstable, \d broken, groups broken was CVS 3-22-99 \d broken?
Next
From: Massimo Dal Zotto
Date:
Subject: static oid