=?UTF-8?Q?Salvador_Fandi=c3=b1o?= <sfand...@gmail.com> writes: > On 03/12/2016 04:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> How much of a user-visible change would that be, if the "processed" >> field of a spi_exec_query() result started coming back as an NV not >> an IV? I'm not sure how much that would affect semantics in typical >> Perl code.
> At the Perl level, IVs and NVs are mostly indistinguishable, and Perl > does promote values internally from IVs to NVs to avoid overflows > automatically. Sounds good. I notice that the manual discourages people from using spi_exec_query() for "big" results, which means we could possibly get away without doing anything here; but I'll feel better about it if we can push the upper limit to 2^53 or so. Given that text in the manual, I think it might be worth the code space to do it like this: (SPI_processed > INT_MAX) ? newSVnv(SPI_processed) : newSViv(SPI_processed) since the NV code path is presumably a bit slower and it's very likely that users would never actually need it. I wonder whether this idea has analogues for python and tcl ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers