Re: Incorrect comment in fe-lobj.c
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Incorrect comment in fe-lobj.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 14821.1346031769@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Incorrect comment in fe-lobj.c (Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Incorrect comment in fe-lobj.c
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> writes: > I found following in fe-lobj.c: > * currently, only L_SET is a legal value for whence > I don't know where "L_SET" comes from. Hmm, seems to be that way in the original commit to our CVS (Postgres95). I don't find this code at all in Postgres v4r2 though. > Anyway this should be: > * whence must be one of SEEK_SET, SEEK_CUR or SEEK_END. Agreed. But looking at this brings a thought to mind: our code is assuming that SEEK_SET, SEEK_CUR, SEEK_END have identical values on the client and server. The lack of complaints over the past fifteen years suggests that every Unix-oid platform is in fact using the same values for these macros ... but that seems kind of a risky assumption. Is it worth changing? And if so, how would we go about that? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: