On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Jaime Casanova <ja...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Jaime Casanova <ja...@2ndquadrant.com> >> wrote: >>>> Sorry, here's the patch rebased and with the suggestion from Alex. >>>> Which reminds me, I never thank him for the review (shame on me) :D >>> >>> with the patch this time >> >> This may be a stupid idea, but it seems to me that it might be better >> to dispense with all of the logic in here to detect whether the file >> name is still going to be long enough after chomping the extension. I >> feel like that's just making things complicated. > > while i like the idea of separating the logic, i don't like the results: > > for example i tried this (notice that i forgot the point), and it just > says nothing (not even that the file with the extension but without > the point doesn't exist). that's why we were checking that the length > matches > > $ ./pg_archivecleanup -x "bz2" /tmp 000000010000000100000058
Hmm, but I thought that the idea was that the extension was optional. Perhaps I'm missing something but I don't think the previous patch will complain about that either; or at least I don't see why the behavior should be any different. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
