On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Jon Nelson <jnelson+pg...@jamponi.net> wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Jon Nelson escribió:
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Jon Nelson <jnelson+pg...@jamponi.net> 
>>> wrote:
>>> > That's true. I originally wrote the patch using fallocate(2). What
>>> > would be appropriate here? Should I switch on the return value and the
>>> > six (6) or so relevant error codes?
>>> I addressed this, hopefully in a reasonable way.
>> Would it work to just assign the value you got from posix_fallocate (if
>> nonzero) to errno and then use %m in the errmsg() call in ereport()?
> That strikes me as a better way. I'll work something up soon.
> Thanks!

Please find attached version 3.
Am I doing this the right way? Should I be posting the full patch each
time, or incremental patches?


Attachment: fallocate-v3.patch
Description: Binary data

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to