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.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: [PATCH 2/5] Make relpathbackend return a statically result instead of palloc()'ing it at 2013-01-08 20:00:22 from Andres Freund

Responses

• Re: [PATCH 2/5] Make relpathbackend return a statically result instead of palloc()'ing it at 2013-01-08 20:38:20 from Alvaro Herrera
• Re: [PATCH 2/5] Make relpathbackend return a statically result instead of palloc()'ing it at 2013-01-08 20:39:57 from Andres Freund
• [PATCH] unified frontend support for pg_malloc et al and palloc/pfree mulation (was xlogreader-v4) at 2013-01-09 11:27:08 from Andres Freund

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Simon Riggs	Date: 2013-01-08 20:30:49
	Subject: Re: Cascading replication: should we detect/prevent cycles?
Previous:	From: Andrew Dunstan	Date: 2013-01-08 20:26:36
	Subject: Re: json api WIP patch