On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 2:37 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 12:12:37AM +0100, Juan José Santamaría Flecha > wrote: > > I've broken the patch in two: > > 1. fixes the detection of unseekable files in checkSeek(), using logic > that > > hopefully is backpatchable, > > 2. the improvements on file type detection for stat() proposed by the OP. > > I am OK with 0002, so I'll try to get this part backpatched down to > where the implementation of stat() has been added. I am not > completely sure that 0001 is the right way forward, though, > particularly with the long-term picture.. In the backend, we have one > caller of fseeko() as of read_binary_file(), so we would never pass > down a pipe to that. However, there could be a risk of some silent > breakages on Windows if some new code relies on that? > > There is a total of 11 callers of fseeko() in pg_dump, so rather than > relying on checkSeek() to see if it actually works, I'd like to think > that we should have a central policy to make this code more > bullet-proof in the future. > WFM, making fseek() behaviour more resilient seems like a good improvement overall. Should we open a new thread to make that part more visible? Regards, Juan José Santamaría Flecha
