At Fri, 24 Feb 2023 16:31:27 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote in
> I noticed that the commit e9960732a9 introduced the following message.
>
> + if (EndCompressFileHandle(ctx->dataFH) != 0)
> + pg_fatal("could not close blob data file: %m");
>
> It seems that we have removed the terminology "blob(s)" from
> user-facing messages by the commit 35ce24c333 (discussion is [1]).
> Shouldn't we use "large object" instead of "blob" in the message?
>
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/868a381f-4650-9460-1726-1ffd39a270b4%40enterprisedb.com
Mmm. The following changes of e9960732a9 seem like reverting the
previous commit 35ce24c333...
e9960732a9 @ 2023/2/23:
- if (cfclose(ctx->dataFH) != 0)
- pg_fatal("could not close LO data file: %m");
+ /* Close the BLOB data file itself */
+ if (EndCompressFileHandle(ctx->dataFH) != 0)
+ pg_fatal("could not close blob data file: %m");
- if (cfwrite(buf, len, ctx->LOsTocFH) != len)
- pg_fatal("could not write to LOs TOC file");
+ if (CFH->write_func(buf, len, CFH) != len)
+ pg_fatal("could not write to blobs TOC file");
..
- if (cfclose(ctx->LOsTocFH) != 0)
- pg_fatal("could not close LOs TOC file: %m");
+ if (EndCompressFileHandle(ctx->LOsTocFH) != 0)
+ pg_fatal("could not close blobs TOC file: %m");
35ce24c333 @ 2022/12/5:
- pg_fatal("could not close blob data file: %m");
+ pg_fatal("could not close LO data file: %m");
...
- if (cfwrite(buf, len, ctx->blobsTocFH) != len)
- pg_fatal("could not write to blobs TOC file");
+ if (cfwrite(buf, len, ctx->LOsTocFH) != len)
+ pg_fatal("could not write to LOs TOC file");
...
- pg_fatal("could not close blob data file: %m");
+ pg_fatal("could not close LO data file: %m");
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center