Re: [HACKERS] Bug in WAL backup documentation

On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 07:11:35PM -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 11:49:36 -0500,
>   Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > 
> > As already discussed upthread, anyone who wants the path can get it from
> > `pwd` or local equivalent --- and that mechanism is robust (as long as
> > the directory move doesn't happen while any particular instance of the
> > script is running).  I don't see why we should go out of our way to
> > provide a bad substitute for pwd.
> 
> I think you also still need read access to the intervening directories.
> If the command works by walking up and matching inode numbers with names,
> then it will break if it can't read the names. (For example /bin/pwd
> breaks when it can't read a parent directories filenames.)

That's system dependant though, Linux getcwd doesn't have that problem
for example. Should probably dig up some documention on which systems
would be affected by this.

Have a ncie day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.