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: