On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 02:25:16AM +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
> > OK, thanks for the feedback. I understand now. The contents of the
> > string will potentially have a larger integer, but the byte length of
> > the string in the wire protocol doesn't change.
> >
> > Let's wait for Vik to reply and I think we can move forward.
>
> Unfortunately, I just did some cleanup last week and removed that
> branch. Had I waited a bit more I still would have had all the work I
> had done. I'll see how quickly I can redo it to get to the part where I
> got scared of what I was doing.
>
> It will have to wait until next week though; I am currently at FOSDEM.
OK, thanks. I thought it only required passing the int64 around until
it got into the string passed to the client. The original patch is in
the email archives if you want it.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
