Merge lp://qastaging/~akopytov/percona-xtrabackup/bug1273207-2.1 into lp://qastaging/percona-xtrabackup/2.1

Proposed by Alexey Kopytov
Status: Merged
Approved by: Sergei Glushchenko
Approved revision: no longer in the source branch.
Merged at revision: 731
Proposed branch: lp://qastaging/~akopytov/percona-xtrabackup/bug1273207-2.1
Merge into: lp://qastaging/percona-xtrabackup/2.1
Diff against target: 180 lines (+54/-29)
6 files modified
src/common.h (+24/-0)
src/xbcrypt.c (+3/-3)
src/xbcrypt.h (+1/-2)
src/xbcrypt_read.c (+8/-8)
src/xbstream_read.c (+6/-16)
test/t/bug1273207.sh (+12/-0)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://qastaging/~akopytov/percona-xtrabackup/bug1273207-2.1
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Sergei Glushchenko (community) g2 Approve
Review via email: mp+208729@code.qastaging.launchpad.net

Description of the change

    Bug #1273207: SIGPIPE handling of xbstream

    Replaced my_read(..., MYF(MY_FULL_IO)) with a new wrapper around
    my_read() which does the same, but bails out on EOF and errors returning
    the total number of successfully read bytes. This allows to detect a
    closed pipe and abort instead of waiting infinitely for more data.

http://jenkins.percona.com/view/PXB%202.1/job/percona-xtrabackup-2.1-param/551/

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Sergei Glushchenko (sergei.glushchenko) wrote :

xb_crypt_read_callback returns ssize_t while xb_read_full returns size_t. Negative values do not make sense for both.
Is there any reason to conversion size_t -> ssize_t in xb_read_full?
xb_crypt_read_callback definition changed by this patch anyway, maybe would be better to return size_t from
xb_crypt_read_callback? It would also allow to get rid of a number of type conversions in xbcrypt_read.c

review: Needs Information (g2)
Revision history for this message
Alexey Kopytov (akopytov) wrote :

Right, xb_crypt_read_callback() does not have to return ssize_t. Recommitted.

http://jenkins.percona.com/view/PXB%202.1/job/percona-xtrabackup-2.1-param/554/

Revision history for this message
Sergei Glushchenko (sergei.glushchenko) wrote :

Approve

review: Approve (g2)

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches

to all changes: