Hi, On 2019-04-28 19:24:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> writes: > > ISTM that we should try to come up with a way of making code like this > > work, rather than placing the burden on new code to get it right. > > Other than "use the right datatype", I'm not sure what we can do? > In the meantime, somebody should fix ab0dfc961b6 ...
I think we should start by just removing all uses of long. There's really no excuse for them today, and a lot of them are bugs waiting to happen. And then either just add a comment to the coding style, or even better a small script, to prevent them from being re-used. > > Also, "off_t" is only 32-bits on Windows, which broke parallel CREATE > > INDEX (issued fixed by commit aa551830). I suppose that "off_t" is > > really a variant of the same problem. > > Hmm, why is this a problem? We should only use off_t for actual file > access operations, and we don't use files greater than 1GB. (There's a > reason for that.) We read from larger files in a few places though. E.g. pg_dump. Most places really just should use pgoff_t... Greetings, Andres Freund
