| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: fd.c: flush data problems on osx |
| Date: | 2016-04-13 23:02:20 |
| Message-ID: | 5133.1460588540@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2016-04-13 18:09:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, I just noticed another issue here, which is that FileWriteback
>> and the corresponding smgr routines are declared with bogusly narrow
>> "amount" arguments --- eg, it's silly that FileWriteback only takes
>> an int amount.
> Well, I modeled it after the nearby routines (like FileRead), which all
> only take an amount in int. Now there might be less reason to read a lot
> of data at once, than to flush large amounts; but it still didn't seem
> necessary to break with the rest of the functions in the file.
Well, those APIs are pretty historical. I think it's useful to get
new ones correct from the outset.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-04-13 23:15:23 | Re: Why doesn't src/backend/port/win32/socket.c implement bind()? |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-04-13 22:56:39 | Re: Why doesn't src/backend/port/win32/socket.c implement bind()? |