[moved to squid-dev without cc to original poster] On tis, 2008-11-18 at 23:25 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote: > Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > > On tis, 2008-11-18 at 21:14 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote: > > > >> Do you have the same 64/32 bit settings and --with-large-files on both > >> builds? > > > > Didn't we make the cache and swap.state format large-files independent > > in Squid-3? > > Not 3.0 that I know of.
Checking..
StoreObject TLV data:
uint64_t swap_file_sz;
StoreSwapLogData:
uint64_t swap_file_sz;
No off_t references anywhere, so the on-disk format should be
large-files agnostic from what I can tell.
But it's very sensitive to 32/64-bit as pretty much everything then
changes, for example time_t changes..
> Certainly not different between stable9 and stable10.
Agreed.
> The only piece of s10 that touched the filesystem would have possibly
> reduced files being saved with negative lengths. Not added unreadable
> files anywhere.
?
Reading 3.0.STABLE10 diff... and not much wiser what this is about.
But this fragment won't work:
StoreIOBuffer(size_t aLength, int64_t anOffset, char *someData) :
+ if (aLength <0) {
size_t aLength is an unsigned quantity and can never be <0.
wonder why gcc doesn't warn on this.. maybe I have forgot that warning
flag again.. oh, right I don't have that warning option enabled for
Squid yet.. (part of -Wextra which is till a bit too noisy on our code,
no separate flag exists from what I can tell)
Regards
Henrik
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
