Corinna, On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 02:56:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 01:07:28PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > > Was this the right thing to do? > > The patch isn't correct since it now calls fdsock() twice which allocates > a new fhandler even if the line before already had created one. > > Better: > > fhandler_socket* res_fh = fdsock (fd, name, soc)->set_addr_family (af); > if (af == AF_LOCAL) > res_fh->set_sun_path (name);
Oops, I thought that the second call would only return a pointer to the previously created fhandler. > However, I don't understand the need for that patch. Does postgresql > call getsockname() before calling bind()? I don't know, but I guess that it does. > So, IMO, the correct way is to clean up cygwin_getsockname() > so that it always returns "something" instead of SEGVing. > > Could you please test the below patch if that works with postgresql? The above works great! Thanks, Jason
