Re: Return value of PathNameOpenFile() - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Gustafsson
Subject Re: Return value of PathNameOpenFile()
Date
Msg-id 95EEA870-F018-43FE-A6BC-853D9E6794F4@yesql.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Return value of PathNameOpenFile()  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Return value of PathNameOpenFile()
List pgsql-hackers
> On 6 Sep 2022, at 16:12, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
>> Agreed, zero should be valid as it's a non-negative integer.  However, callers
>> in fd.c are themselves checking for (fd <= 0) in some cases, and some have done
>> so since the very early days of the codebase, so I wonder if there historically
>> used to be a platform which considered 0 an invalid fd?
>
> I'm betting it's a thinko that never got caught because 0 would
> always be taken up by stdin.  Maybe you'd notice if you tried to
> close-and-reopen stdin, but that's not something the server ever does.

Doh, of course.  The attached is a quick (lightly make check tested) take on
allowing 0, but I'm not sure that's what we want?

--
Daniel Gustafsson        https://vmware.com/


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: allowing for control over SET ROLE
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: allowing for control over SET ROLE