Re: BufFileRead() error signalling

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BufFileRead() error signalling
Date: 2020-01-29 06:26:40
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 03:51:54PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I quickly reread that thread and I don't see that there's any firm
> consensus there in favor of "read %d of %zu" over "read only %d of %zu
> bytes". Now, if most people prefer the former, so be it, but I don't
> think that's clear from that thread.

The argument of consistency falls in favor of the former on HEAD:
$ git grep "could not read" | grep "read %d of %zu" | wc -l
$ git grep "could not read" | grep "read only %d of %zu" | wc -l

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Movead Li 2020-01-29 06:41:07 Re: Append with naive multiplexing of FDWs
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-01-29 06:23:06 Re: Setting min/max TLS protocol in clientside libpq