On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 02:32:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I think checking SIZEOF_LONG would be preferred, since that's what > we use elsewhere. Although actually I wonder why this code exists > at all --- wouldn't it be easier to make these depend on "int64"?
It does use int64. However, ecpg uses HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT64 to decide whether it's datatype ECPGt_long_long exists. I changed the patch to use the same define as usual. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo/Skype: michaelmeskes, Jabber: mes...@jabber.org VfL Borussia! Forca Barca! Go SF 49ers! Use: Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
