From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: tiny fix needed |
Date: | 2006-11-27 18:05:57 |
Message-ID: | 21223.1164650757@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Hmm. Well, it turns out that pg_vfprintf is declared static in our
> snprintf.c. The only place vfprintf is used in the backend is in elog.c,
> although it is used in a variety of frontend programs, so it looks like
> this needs to be fixed properly.
> Is there any reason we shouldn't treat vfprintf the same as other
> members of the printf family?
It certainly seems odd that we don't. I suppose that at some point
someone thought that vfprintf wasn't used anywhere --- but obviously
it is now, so I'd vote for changing it. Given that we do have working
(because used by other entry points) pg_vfprintf, I'd argue that this
is a trivial fix and OK to do after RC1.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2006-11-27 18:11:20 | Re: [CORE] RC1 blocker issues |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-11-27 18:02:50 | Re: [CORE] RC1 blocker issues |