Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> AFAICS mkdatadir() shouldn't consider subdir == NULL as a reason to > >> fail rather than trying mkdir_p. > > > Right. In fact, I can't see any good reason to call mkdir and then > > mkdir_p at all. See my patch from this afternoon. > > I'm unsure about that. I liked the original idea of only trying mkdir_p > when plain mkdir() had failed with ENOENT. I am not convinced your > proposed patch will behave desirably under all error cases. In > particular, mkdir_p seems rather dependent on knowing just which errno > codes will get returned --- which is okay for its heritage as BSD-only > code, but how well will it port? Better to only invoke it when we have > reason to think it can help.
I am inclined to apply the existing patch and see if we get actual errno failures from port testing. -- 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
