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? -- Jon
fallocate-v3.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
