| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: -DDISABLE_ENABLE_ASSERT |
| Date: | 2014-05-23 13:56:03 |
| Message-ID: | 5132.1400853363@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> That means you're for a (differently named) disable macro? Or is it not
>> recent enough that you don't care?
> I'm leaning toward thinking we should just rip it out. The fact that
> 3 out of the 4 people commenting on this thread have used it at some
> point provides some evidence that it has more than no value - but on
> the other hand, there's a cost to keeping it around.
Yeah. For the record, I've used it too (don't recall what for exactly).
But I don't think it's worth adding yet another layer of complication for.
The main argument for it given in this thread is recompile cost ...
but TBH, I have one word for anybody who's worried about that, and
that word is "ccache". If you don't have that tool installed, you're
missing out on a huge timesaver.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-05-23 13:59:52 | Re: -DDISABLE_ENABLE_ASSERT |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-05-23 13:43:32 | Re: Re: popen and pclose redefinitions causing many warning in Windows build |