Re: BUG #15460: Error while creating index or constraint
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #15460: Error while creating index or constraint |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEepm=3A3YU+4dJPFA=+PhiZMft=opbNmiCcN=kVGgBbLhC79w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #15460: Error while creating index or constraint (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #15460: Error while creating index or constraint
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 6:50 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 1:50 AM Thomas Munro > <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > I think using pgoff_t would fix the problem on Windows, but on other > > systems where it maps directly to off_t it might also be 32 bits, so > > I'm not entirely sure what pgoff_t is for. Perhaps we should just use > > int64 directly for this? Like in the attached draft patch. I don't > > have a Windows system to test it on. A separate bug report that came > > in today[1] has repro steps that could be used to validate it. > > I think that int64 is the way to go. Thanks. So, a practical matter: The change of return type as proposed is an ABI break for 32 bit off_t systems. BufFileSize() is brand new and seems pretty unlikely to be used by extensions so soon. Could we change that? A conservative alternative would be to define a second function BufFileSize64() and use that for parallel CREATE INDEX in REL_11_STABLE, leaving the off_t version as it is, but then fold them back into a single version in master. > Should I fix up the diagnostic message to address Tom's complaints > about that in a separate patch? +1 -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: