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

From Erik Riedel
Subject Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins
Date
Msg-id MrE1MvW00gNt81tBp8@andrew.cmu.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjoins  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Excerpts from mail: 10-May-99 Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit hashjo.. by Tom
Lane@sss.pgh.pa.us 
> I believe this is fixed, but it'd be nice to have some confirmation from
> someone with a platform where long != int ...  Erik, have you tried it
> recently?
>  
Sorry for the slow response.

I tried this when the fix was first done, and I thought I reported to
the list that it worked fine.

I actually have not updated my tree since then, so I don't know about
changes after 25 March.  My logs say:

630     snapshot from postgresql CVS (25 March 1999)
631     fix for 64-bit LONGALIGN (works!)

I have been using that version since March without problems (well, at
least no problems with 64-bit ints and hashjoins...).

Erik



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Hiroshi Inoue"
Date:
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Open 6.5 items
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] GEQO optimizer (was Re: Backend message type 0x44 arrived while idle)