Обсуждение: pgsql-server/src/interfaces/libpq Makefile
CVSROOT: /cvsroot
Module name: pgsql-server
Changes by: momjian@postgresql.org 03/04/21 22:21:34
Modified files:
src/interfaces/libpq: Makefile
Log message:
Add dirmod to libpq Makefile.
momjian@postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian - CVS) writes:
> Modified files:
> src/interfaces/libpq: Makefile
> Log message:
> Add dirmod to libpq Makefile.
Why? libpq doesn't use rename, and I don't think it should be using
unlink (someone *please* tell me that that unlink in getaddrinfo_unix
is a brain-dead error...)
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > momjian@postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian - CVS) writes: > > Modified files: > > src/interfaces/libpq: Makefile > > > Log message: > > Add dirmod to libpq Makefile. > > Why? libpq doesn't use rename, and I don't think it should be using Also, keep in mind that it will effect other clients who do use rename/unlink. The question is whether they assume Unix semantics on those commands. I don't know the answer, but I assumed they did. > unlink (someone *please* tell me that that unlink in getaddrinfo_unix > is a brain-dead error...) Not sure --- that's why I added it. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Why? libpq doesn't use rename, and I don't think it should be using
> Also, keep in mind that it will effect other clients who do use
> rename/unlink. The question is whether they assume Unix semantics on
> those commands. I don't know the answer, but I assumed they did.
I don't believe any of our standard clients care, and in any case libpq
is not the place to put it if they do.
>> unlink (someone *please* tell me that that unlink in getaddrinfo_unix
>> is a brain-dead error...)
> Not sure --- that's why I added it.
Even if it's correct (which I doubt) it's inside #ifdef
HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS and therefore irrelevant to Windows.
regards, tom lane
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> unlink (someone *please* tell me that that unlink in getaddrinfo_unix
>> is a brain-dead error...)
> Not sure --- that's why I added it.
After further research I conclude it is at best unnecessary and at worst
dangerous. It is unnecessary because Lock_AF_UNIX() will alreay have
unlink'ed any pre-existing socket file in the postmaster-startup case.
It is dangerous because there is no reason that anyone would expect
getaddrinfo() to have destructive side-effects. Certainly the
discussion of the AI_PASSIVE flag in the Linux manpage for getaddrinfo
doesn't suggest any such thing.
I'm going to remove it.
regards, tom lane