Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Thursday 05 March 2009 18:04:42 Joshua Tolley wrote:
As an aside, is access() adequately portable, ok to use within the
backend, etc.? I just sort of took a shot in the dark.
Using access() is usually not a good idea. In this case it would be better to
check the return of the actual open() call for EPERM (or the equivalent for
fopen(), whatever is used).
That's what we do in the proper fix in HEAD. It requires an API change
to backport it...

Given that I think this is the first time we've heard of this issue, I'm
thinking we should probably just not bother to backpatch it.


Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 12 of 13 | next ›
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-hackers @
postedMar 4, '09 at 2:26a
activeMar 5, '09 at 9:43p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase