| From: | CharSyam <charsyam(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] adding simple sock check for windows |
| Date: | 2018-03-31 06:35:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAMrLSE5WoKPjP1=bT0V4aNbQcOPc3Y7J6cr0zjNE3Q5j0AiZhA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amit, I agree with you.
I changed my patch :) to remove old check.
2018-03-31 15:17 GMT+09:00 Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 11:42 AM, CharSyam <charsyam(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Hi, Amit, It's good question. I also thought about it.
>>
>> But, I want to leave original code intention.
>>
>> Actually I think there is no case ( slot->sock is not PGINVALID_SOCKET
>> and slot->sock < 0)
>>
>> but if original code want to check (sock < -1)
>>
>
> If you see the code of PQsocket, then that won't be possible.
>
>
>> I think it is better to leave that condition.
>>
>> but I think slot->sock == PGINVALID_SOCKET is enough
>>
>
> It is up to you, but I don't see any reason to retain the old check.
>
> --
> With Regards,
> Amit Kapila.
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| simple_check.patch | application/octet-stream | 473 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nikhil Sontakke | 2018-03-31 07:53:39 | Re: Feature Request - DDL deployment with logical replication |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2018-03-31 06:17:47 | Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] adding simple sock check for windows |