Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Uhm, we don't have & need palloc support and I don't think
> > relpathbackend() is a good justification for adding it.
> 
> I've said from the very beginning of this effort that it would be
> impossible to share any meaningful amount of code between frontend and
> backend environments without adding some sort of emulation of
> palloc/pfree/elog.  I think this patch is just making the code uglier
> and more fragile to put off the inevitable, and that we'd be better
> served to bite the bullet and do that.

As far as this patch is concerned, I think it's sufficient to do

#define palloc(x) malloc(x)
#define pfree(x) free(x)

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

• Re: [PATCH 2/5] Make relpathbackend return a statically result instead of palloc()'ing it at 2013-01-08 20:27:23 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Andres Freund	Date: 2013-01-08 20:39:57
	Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Make relpathbackend return a statically result instead of palloc()'ing it
Previous:	From: Alvaro Herrera	Date: 2013-01-08 20:36:19
	Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Centralize Assert* macros into c.h so its common between backend/frontend