Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Meskes
Subject Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix
Date
Msg-id 20010405104003.A15090@feivel.credativ.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to AW: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix  (Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at>)
Responses Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 10:01:53AM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
> I do agree with the statement, that HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 shoud be
> defined on all platforms where the compiler understands it to be 64bits.
> It would imho be the responsibility of backend code, to only do one of
> the two if both are defined.

I just committed some changes so that ecpg does acceptt "long long"
variables all the time, but repleces them with type "long" if
HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 is not defined. This appears to be a strategy similar
to the one used by the backend.

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Michael@Fam-Meskes.De
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire!
Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Meskes
Date:
Subject: Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix
Next
From: "Vadim Mikheev"
Date:
Subject: Re: RE: [BUGS] Loosing files after backend crash