Tom Lane wrote: > Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> What I'm wondering about is whether we are comparing the right number of > >> bytes ... have both address structs been reported to have the same > >> length? Maybe we need a min(). > > > I disagree. If getsockname(), getpeername() or recvfrom() return > > different address length's, it'd be more an indicator that the addresses > > ARE different anyway. > > Hm, good point. But I still feel that we are jumping to a conclusion > without understanding what's going on. I'd like to know *why* the > addresses are different on Adam's machine, before we conclude that we > mustn't try to check that they are the same.
Agreed. We should know exactly what is happening. My only point earlier is that this has to be fixed for 7.4. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
