* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> > The only remaining place we still clear errno in pg_dump is in
> > pg_backup_archive.c:checkSeek() around a similar ftello call, perhaps
> > that should be changed to check the result instead also?
>
> Agreed; we should be using the same coding pattern wherever we call
> ftello.
Ok, I'll take care of that in a couple of hours (have to step out for a
bit).
> I suspect that this code may be left over from coping with some ancient
> non-spec-compliant version of ftello? Probably not worth digging in
> the archives to find out. The Single Unix Spec v2 says that the result
> is (off_t) -1 on error, and we generally assume that platforms are at
> least compliant with that.
I had been wondering the same, but agree w/ your assessment.
> grep shows me a couple of other places where the result of ftello doesn't
> seem to be getting checked for error. Odd that Coverity didn't notice
> those.
I'll try to figure out why it didn't, I would have expected it to. It's
possible I just hadn't gotten to those yet or someone decided they were
non-issues.
Thanks,
Stephen
