On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 1:28 PM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coe...@gmail.com> wrote: > At present, we represent temp files as a signed long int number. And > depending on the system architecture (32 bit or 64 bit), the range of > signed long int varies, for example on a 32-bit system it will range > from -2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647. AFAIU, this will not allow a > session to create more than 2 billion temporary files and that is not > a small number at all, but still what if we make it an unsigned long > int which will allow a session to create 4 billion temporary files if > needed. I might be sounding a little stupid here because 2 billion > temporary files is like 2000 peta bytes (2 billion * 1GB), considering > each temp file is 1GB in size which is not a small data size at all, > it is a huge amount of data storage. However, since the variable we > use to name temporary files is a static long int (static long > tempFileCounter = 0;), there is a possibility that this number will > get exhausted soon if the same session is trying to create too many > temp files via multiple queries.
I think we use signed integer types in a bunch of places where an unsigned integer type would be straight-up better, and this is one of them. I don't know whether it really matters, though. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
