Re: Getting rid of some more lseek() calls
| От | Michael Paquier |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Getting rid of some more lseek() calls |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20200213071400.GH1520@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Getting rid of some more lseek() calls (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 02:51:44PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Ok, how about this?
Alvaro's point sounds sensible to me. I like the approach you are
taking in 0001. At least it avoids more issues with WIN32 and stat()
(I hope to work on that at some point, we'll see..).
+/*
+ * pg_file_size --- return the size of a file
+ */
+int64
+pg_file_size(int fd)
+{
This routine has nothing really dependent on the backend. Would it
make sense to put it in a different place where it can be used by the
frontend? The function should include at least a comment about why we
have a special path for Windows, aka not falling into the trap of the
4GB limit for stat().
The commit message of 0001 mentions pg_read(), and that should be
pg_pread().
There are two combinations of lseek/read that could be replaced: one
in pg_receivewal.c:FindStreamingStart(), and one in
SimpleXLogPageRead() for parsexlog.c as of pg_rewind.
Patch 0002 looks good to me. This actually removes a confusion when
failing to seek the end of the file as the offset referenced to would
be 0. Patch 0003 is also a very good thing.
--
Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: