| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Michael Harris <harmic(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS |
| Date: | 2024-12-16 14:44:44 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoa2fQihhhtvOD7BnTofmDa8OkDccFHB0i5NeyP-MZCs0A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 9:12 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Personally I don't like the obfuscation of "allocate" and "zero" vs just
> naming the function names. But I guess that's just taste thing.
>
> When looking for problems it's considerably more work with bytes, because - at
> least for me - the large number is hard to compare quickly and to know how
> aggressively we extended also requires to translate to blocks.
FWIW, I think that what we report in the error should hew as closely
to the actual system call as possible. Hence, I agree with your first
complaint and would prefer to simply see the system calls named, but I
disagree with your second complaint and would prefer to see the byte
count.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2024-12-16 14:53:42 | Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2024-12-16 14:38:06 | Re: Regression tests fail on OpenBSD due to low semmns value |