| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_restore [archiver] file offset in dump file is too |
| Date: | 2005-11-02 20:36:13 |
| Message-ID: | 8220.1130963773@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> There is no fseeko in the Windows libraries, nor any provision in the
> mingw headers that I can see for a 64 bit off_t. So we would need to
> roll our own to some extent - I think we need more than just a bit of
> configure cleverness.
> However, there is a Windows library routine to do a 64bit seek and
> return the file position, so we could fairly easily implement fseeko and
> ftello based on that. See
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/vclib/html/_crt__lseek.2c_._lseeki64.asp
Is there any risk that the mingw libraries would fail when manipulating
a file whose current offset exceeds 32 bits? I'm wondering if we'd have
to roll our own stdio in toto, not just fseeko/ftello :-(
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-11-02 20:42:42 | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-11-02 20:26:25 | Re: pg_restore [archiver] file offset in dump file is too |