On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 10:56:03PM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
Hopefully last turn in this topic. For NUMERIC types, the safe minimum
alignment is a pointer because there are 5 int members followed by
two pointer members in this struct. I got a crash from this with a lucky
query and
Hi,
2011-11-17 14:53 keltezéssel, Michael Meskes írta:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 09:06:30AM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
Yes, you are right. For timestamp and interval, the safe alignment is int64.
Patch is attached.
Applied, thanks.
Michael
thanks.
Hopefully last turn in this topic.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 09:06:30AM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
Yes, you are right. For timestamp and interval, the safe alignment is int64.
Patch is attached.
Applied, thanks.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at
2011-11-13 17:27 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
Boszormenyi Zoltan z...@cybertec.at writes:
I had a report about ECPG code crashing which involved
a query using a date field. Attached is a one liner fix to make
the date type's offset computed consistently across
sqlda_common_total_size(),
This must have been a cut and paste bug and is incorrect
in 9.0.x, 9.1.x and GIT HEAD. It would be nice to have it
applied before the next point releases come out.
Applied, thanks for the patch.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Boszormenyi Zoltan z...@cybertec.at writes:
I had a report about ECPG code crashing which involved
a query using a date field. Attached is a one liner fix to make
the date type's offset computed consistently across
sqlda_common_total_size(), sqlda_compat_total_size() and
