On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Jeevan Chalke wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada.m...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > And the line number should be switched to 1 when line number has
>> > reached to INT_MAX?
>> Yes, when it goes beyond INT_MAX, wrap around to 1.
>> BTW, I wonder, can't we simply use unsigned int instead?
> That was my thought also: let the variable be unsigned, and have it wrap
> around normally.  So once you reach UINT_MAX, the next line number is
> zero (instead of getting stuck at UINT_MAX, which would be rather
> strange).  Anyway I don't think anyone is going to reach the UINT_MAX
> limit ... I mean that would be one hell of a query, wouldn't it.  If
> your query is upwards of a million lines, surely you are in deep trouble
> already.
> Does your text editor handle files longer than 4 billion lines?

As you said, if line number reached UINT_MAX then I think that this
case is too strange.
I think INT_MAX is enough for line number.

The v5 patch which Jeevan is created seems to good.
But one point, I got hunk when patch is applied to HEAD. (doc file)
So I have revised it and attached.


Sawada Masahiko

Attachment: psql-line-number_v5.patch
Description: Binary data

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to