Re: [HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-03-19 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 03/19/2012 02:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Haas writes: maybe we should just rip out pg_backup_files/archFiles altogether. pg_dump is crufty enough without supporting undocumented and obsolete options for multiple decades. +1 Yeah, go for it. cheers andrew

Re: [HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-03-19 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > maybe we should just rip out pg_backup_files/archFiles altogether. > pg_dump is crufty enough without supporting undocumented and obsolete > options for multiple decades. +1 regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@po

Re: [HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-03-19 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 3:58 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On tor, 2012-03-01 at 19:19 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> I think the best fix would be to rearrange _PrintFileData() so that it >> doesn't use FH at all.  Instead, we could define a separate >> ArchiveHandle field IF that works more l

Re: [HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-03-17 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2012-03-01 at 19:19 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I think the best fix would be to rearrange _PrintFileData() so that it > doesn't use FH at all. Instead, we could define a separate > ArchiveHandle field IF that works more like OF, and then change > ahwrite() to use that. Here is a pat

Re: [HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-03-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On fre, 2012-02-24 at 11:10 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: > > On tor, 2012-02-23 at 10:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> void * seems entirely reasonable given the two different usages, but > >> I would be happier if the patch added explicit casts whereever FH is > >> set to or us

Re: [HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-02-24 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut writes: > On tor, 2012-02-23 at 10:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> void * seems entirely reasonable given the two different usages, but >> I would be happier if the patch added explicit casts whereever FH is >> set to or used as one of these two types. > That would add about 70 cast

Re: [HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-02-24 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2012-02-23 at 10:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: > > Fixing most of this is not difficult, see attached patch. The only > > ugliness is in pg_backup_archiver.h > > > FILE *FH; /* General purpose file handle */ > > > which is used throughout pg_dump

Re: [HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-02-23 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut writes: > Fixing most of this is not difficult, see attached patch. The only > ugliness is in pg_backup_archiver.h > FILE *FH; /* General purpose file handle */ > which is used throughout pg_dump as sometimes a real FILE* and sometimes > a gzFile handle. Ther

[HACKERS] incompatible pointer types with newer zlib

2012-02-23 Thread Peter Eisentraut
According to me update logs, somewhere between zlib versions 1.2.3.4 and 1.2.6, the definition of the gzFile type was changed from void * to struct gzFile_s *, an opaque struct. Note that gzFile is already the pointer in either case. Our code has assumed, however, that you use gzFile like FILE, n