Re: close() vs. closesocket()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: close() vs. closesocket()
Date: 2003-04-25 14:10:23
Message-ID: 15473.1051279823@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> writes:
> Windows' sockets aren't very good.

They seem to be good enough that we have not had to worry about it,
with the exception of the close/closesocket issue and the nonstandard
error reporting mechanism. But both of those have been worked around
for a long time in the libpq sources. Do we really need to insert a
compatibility layer just to deal with those two problems?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-04-25 14:13:13 Re: close() vs. closesocket()
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-04-25 14:01:44 Re: STABLE functions

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-04-25 14:13:13 Re: close() vs. closesocket()
Previous Message mlw 2003-04-25 12:29:29 Re: close() vs. closesocket()