Thread

1. long ints use for 4-byte entities in ODBC

   Andrew Bell <acbell@iastate.edu> — 2001-12-19T17:52:10Z

   Hi,
   
   I was installing the ODBC driver on an alpha box.  Problem is that there 
   are assumptions in the typedefs that a four byte integer is a "long 
   int".  Of course, this is often an incorrect assumption.  I can fix this, 
   but wanted to know how people wanted this done.  How do you handle this 
   issue in the server?  Seems confingure.in and associated files is the most 
   reasonable way to fix this to me.
   
   Cheers,
   
   
   -- Andrew Bell
   acbell@iastate.edu
           
   
   
   

2. Re: long ints use for 4-byte entities in ODBC

   Peter Harvey <pharvey@codebydesign.com> — 2001-12-19T19:38:29Z

   > I was installing the ODBC driver on an alpha box.  Problem is that there
   > are assumptions in the typedefs that a four byte integer is a "long
   > int".  Of course, this is often an incorrect assumption.  I can fix this,
   > but wanted to know how people wanted this done.  How do you handle this
   > issue in the server?  Seems confingure.in and associated files is the most
   > reasonable way to fix this to me.
   
   Also; which driver manager are you using? I think Nick Gorham has been 
   working on this issue within unixODBC.
   
   Peter
   
   
   

3. Re: long ints use for 4-byte entities in ODBC

   Nick Gorham <nick@easysoft.com> — 2001-12-20T11:41:43Z

   Peter Harvey wrote:
   
   > > I was installing the ODBC driver on an alpha box.  Problem is that there
   > > are assumptions in the typedefs that a four byte integer is a "long
   > > int".  Of course, this is often an incorrect assumption.  I can fix this,
   > > but wanted to know how people wanted this done.  How do you handle this
   > > issue in the server?  Seems confingure.in and associated files is the most
   > > reasonable way to fix this to me.
   >
   > Also; which driver manager are you using? I think Nick Gorham has been
   > working on this issue within unixODBC.
   >
   > Peter
   
   AFAIK there should be nothing wrong with
   
   typedef Int4 int
   
   instead of the
   
   typedef Int4 long
   
   which is plainly wrong on 64 bit platforms.
   
   --
   Nick Gorham
   Easysoft Ltd
   
   
   
   
   

4. Re: long ints use for 4-byte entities in ODBC

   Andrew Bell <acbell@iastate.edu> — 2001-12-20T16:55:56Z

   At 11:41 AM 12/20/2001 +0000, Nick Gorham wrote:
   >Peter Harvey wrote:
   >
   > > > I was installing the ODBC driver on an alpha box.  Problem is that there
   > > > are assumptions in the typedefs that a four byte integer is a "long
   > > > int".  Of course, this is often an incorrect assumption.  I can fix this,
   > > > but wanted to know how people wanted this done.  How do you handle this
   > > > issue in the server?  Seems confingure.in and associated files is the 
   > most
   > > > reasonable way to fix this to me.
   > >
   > > Also; which driver manager are you using? I think Nick Gorham has been
   > > working on this issue within unixODBC.
   > >
   > > Peter
   >
   >AFAIK there should be nothing wrong with
   >
   >typedef Int4 int
   >
   >instead of the
   >
   >typedef Int4 long
   >
   >which is plainly wrong on 64 bit platforms.
   
   Of course, the C standard doesn't say anything about the sizes of any of 
   the int-like datatypes, it only specifies their relative sizes.  MySQL 
   (don't throw stones) addresses the problem like this in configure.in:
   
   -------------------------------------------
   
   AC_CHECK_SIZEOF(int, 4)
   if test "$ac_cv_sizeof_int" -eq 0
   then
      AC_MSG_ERROR("No size for int type.")
   fi
   AC_CHECK_SIZEOF(long, 4)
   if test "$ac_cv_sizeof_long" -eq 0
   then
      AC_MSG_ERROR("No size for long type.")
   fi
   AC_CHECK_SIZEOF(long long, 8)
   if test "$ac_cv_sizeof_long_long" -eq 0
   then
      AC_MSG_ERROR("MySQL needs a long long type.")
   fi
   # off_t is not a builtin type
   MYSQL_CHECK_SIZEOF(off_t, 4)
   if test "$ac_cv_sizeof_off_t" -eq 0
   then
      AC_MSG_ERROR("MySQL needs a off_t type.")
   fi
   
   -------------------------------------------
   
   Coupled with a few SIZEOF_<datatype> checks in the headers which set up the 
   typedefs for sized data, the problem is solved generically.
   
   
   -- Andrew Bell
   acbell@iastate.edu