Horton

Re: Cannot find a working 64-bit integer type on Illumos

Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-04-19T08:34:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 18.04.24 02:31, Thomas Munro wrote:
> For limits, why do we have this:
> 
> - * stdint.h limits aren't guaranteed to have compatible types with our fixed
> - * width types. So just define our own.
> 
> ?  I mean, how could they not have compatible types?

The commit for this was 62e2a8dc2c7 and the thread was 
<https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/E1YatAv-0007cu-KW%40gemulon.postgresql.org>. 
  The problem was that something like

     snprintf(bufm, sizeof(bufm), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MINVALUE);

could issue a warning if, say, INT64_FORMAT, which refers to our own 
int64, is based on long int, but SEQ_MINVALUE, which was then INT64_MIN, 
which refers to int64_t, which could be long long int.

So this is correct.  If we introduce the use of int64_t, then you need 
to be consistent still:

int64, PG_INT64_MIN, PG_INT64_MAX, INT64_FORMAT

int64_t, INT64_MIN, INT64_MAX, PRId64

Commits

  1. Move pg_int64 back to postgres_ext.h

  2. pgbench: Make set_random_seed() 64-bit everywhere.

  3. Use PRI?64 instead of "ll?" in format strings (continued).

  4. Fix order of -I switches for building pg_regress.o.

  5. libpq: Deprecate pg_int64.

  6. Use PRI*64 instead of "ll*" in format strings (minimal trial)

  7. Fix header inclusion order in c.h.

  8. Use <stdint.h> and <inttypes.h> for c.h integers.

  9. Remove traces of BeOS.

  10. More correct way to check for existence of types, which allows to specify