On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 17:16, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 17:04, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> I think what this shows is we should look for a way to avoid using
>>> From some more googling
>> it says it will return (in_addr_t)(-1), though, so maybe we should
>> just move that #ifdef out to some global place?
> Given the way that's written, I think we should just compare the result
> to (in_addr_t)(-1), and not assume there's any macro provided for that.
Well, that doesn't match all other platforms..
> However, now that I know the real issue is you're using inet_addr, I
> would like to know why you're not using inet_aton instead; or even
> better, something that also copes with IPv6.
"Path of least resistance?"
Which method would you suggest?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: David E. Wheeler||Date: 2010-01-28 20:09:54|
|Subject: Re: Add on_trusted_init and on_untrusted_init to plperl [PATCH]|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2010-01-28 20:05:32|
|Subject: Re: Streaming replication, and walsender during recovery|
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-01-28 20:16:24|
|Subject: Re: pgsql: Define INADDR_NONE on Solaris when it's missing. |
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2010-01-28 19:17:22|
|Subject: pgsql: Fix crashing bug at the end of recovery in Streaming Replication, |