From: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: For review: Server instrumentation patch |
Date: | 2005-07-24 16:15:07 |
Message-ID: | 42E3BE8B.2010406@pse-consulting.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us]
>>>Sent: 23 July 2005 20:01
>>>To: Dave Page
>>>Cc: PostgreSQL-development
>>>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] For review: Server instrumentation patch
>>>
>>>
>>>This patch looks good. The only question I have is why you
>>>didn't want
>>>the pgport rename/unlink calls?
Because I wanted the standard platform behaviour of both. For backend
storage subsystem purposes, it's certainly necessary to emulate *ix
behaviour of deleting a file in use, but for generic file access IMHO
the generic behaviour should be exposed.
Please note that there's some rollback logic in pg_file_rename that
might break when using the pg_xxx calls.
Regards,
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Brian Kilpatrick | 2005-07-24 16:29:47 | Re: Going to OSCON? We need your help! |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-07-24 15:53:54 | Re: [HACKERS] Patch to fix plpython on OS X |