Re: BUG #15964: vacuumdb.c:187:10: error: use of undeclaredidentifier 'FD_SETSIZE' - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: BUG #15964: vacuumdb.c:187:10: error: use of undeclaredidentifier 'FD_SETSIZE'
Date
Msg-id 20190818010317.kh5pxpfgpsskc6ip@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #15964: vacuumdb.c:187:10: error: use of undeclared identifier 'FD_SETSIZE'  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #15964: vacuumdb.c:187:10: error: use of undeclared identifier 'FD_SETSIZE'  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
Hi,

On 2019-08-17 20:59:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > Hm. This made me think: Why is
> >                 if (concurrentCons > FD_SETSIZE - 1)
> > a useful test / error message?
> 
> Good point, it's not.  Subtracting off 10 or so might be reasonable.

I wonder if we shouldn't just do the same as pgbench now does, and just
only error when adding a too large fd. That does reduce the number of
detected cases, true, but it also adds robustness, because larger fds
are properly handled.

> > What is the reason that this doesn't use poll() in the first place?
> 
> We still support platforms without that, no?  Windows, for one.

Ah, right. I forgot that because we do rely on poll() in latch.c - but
we do have an alternative windows implementation there...

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #15964: vacuumdb.c:187:10: error: use of undeclared identifier 'FD_SETSIZE'
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #15964: vacuumdb.c:187:10: error: use of undeclared identifier 'FD_SETSIZE'