Re: lo_create(oid, bytea) breaks every extant release of libpq
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: lo_create(oid, bytea) breaks every extant release of libpq |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFj8pRCEB6i+9sAxhgtgQArSDRD7O52T2qHKjp9Ps2ewQFMwUA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: lo_create(oid, bytea) breaks every extant release of libpq (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2014-06-12 6:54 GMT+02:00 Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:57:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:Agreed.
> While there's certainly a good argument to be made for making
> lo_initialize do that query differently, there's no way that we
> can fix every copy of libpq that's in the field. I think we have to
> consider that "there can be only one lo_create" is effectively part of
> the protocol spec for the foreseeable future. (It'd be easy enough
> to add a check in the opr_sanity regression test to catch violations
> of this rule.)
>
> It's also extremely unfortunate that the regression tests don't
> create (or at least don't leave behind) any large objects, as we
> might then have possibly caught this bug much earlier.lo_new() or lo_make()? An earlier draft of the patch that added
> Meanwhile, we have to either revert the addition of lo_create(oid,
> bytea) altogether, or choose a different name for it. Suggestions?
lo_create(oid, bytea) had a similar function named make_lo().
+1 for lo_new
Regards
Pavel
Thanks,
nm
--
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: