From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Rationalizing declarations of src/common/ variables |
Date: | 2021-11-29 15:03:48 |
Message-ID: | 1217276.1638198228@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 Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 9:27 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> What's the value of introducing PGDLLIMPORT_FE? I mean suppose we just
>>> make PGDLLIMPORT expand to nothing in front-end code.
>> Hmm ... fair question. It feels like that risks breaking something,
>> but offhand I can't see what, as long as we're certain that FRONTEND
>> is set correctly in every compile.
> If it isn't, your way might go wrong too, since it depends on FRONTEND
> being set correctly at least at the point when the PGDLLIMPORT_FE
> macro is defined.
Either of these ways would require that FRONTEND is already set correctly
when c.h is read. But all of the hacks you mention do ensure that.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kuntal Ghosh | 2021-11-29 15:04:14 | Re: Add connection active, idle time to pg_stat_activity |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2021-11-29 14:56:17 | Re: Can I assume relation would not be invalid during from ExecutorRun to ExecutorEnd |