"Ken Camann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oh I see. Between this and looking again at the warning list, I see
> that it will probably take a lot more work than I thought. There are
> about 450 occurrences of the assumption that sizeof(size_t) ==
> sizeof(int).
[ blink... ] There are *zero* occurrences of the assumption that
sizeof(size_t) == sizeof(int), unless maybe in some of that grotty
#ifdef WIN32 code. Postgres has run on 64-bit platforms for many
years now.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
