Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for - Change FETCH/MOVE to use int8
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't think this is the right approach. Maybe it would be reasonable to add another arm to the %union instead, not sure. The problem is the amount of ugly casts you have to use below. The scanner code seems to think that a constant larger than the biggest int4 should be treated as float, so I'm not sure why this would work anyway. I'm not sure that I see the point of this at all. ISTM the entire reason for using a cursor is that you're going to fetch the results in bite-size pieces. I don't see the current Postgres source code surviving into the era where 2G rows is considered bite-size ;-) I thought the int8-LIMIT patch was equally pointless, btw, but at least it was not very invasive. This one is not passing the minimum usefulness-to-ugliness ratio for me. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for - Change FETCH/MOVE to use int8
Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't think this is the right approach. Maybe it would be reasonable to add another arm to the %union instead, not sure. The problem is the amount of ugly casts you have to use below. The scanner code seems to think that a constant larger than the biggest int4 should be treated as float, so I'm not sure why this would work anyway. I'm not sure that I see the point of this at all. ISTM the entire reason for using a cursor is that you're going to fetch the results in bite-size pieces. I don't see the current Postgres source code surviving into the era where 2G rows is considered bite-size ;-) Think MOVE to a specific section of the cursor 2gig. I can see that happening. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for - Change FETCH/MOVE to use int8
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: I'm not sure that I see the point of this at all. ISTM the entire reason for using a cursor is that you're going to fetch the results in bite-size pieces. I don't see the current Postgres source code surviving into the era where 2G rows is considered bite-size ;-) Think MOVE to a specific section of the cursor 2gig. I can see that happening. Yeah, and by the time it happens you'll have gotten bored and found something else to do. With no support in the system for random access to a cursor result, this is just about as useless as the FETCH case. In any case I agree with Alvaro's comment: the way to support int8 in a FETCH/MOVE command is not to try to convert the entire rest of the grammar to int8 instead of int4 as its native datatype. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
