From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: many copies of atooid() and oid_cmp() |
Date: | 2017-01-12 14:36:05 |
Message-ID: | 13899.1484231765@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 1/11/17 11:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> +1 for the concept, but I'm a bit worried about putting atooid() in
>> postgres_ext.h. That's going to impose on the namespace of libpq-using
>> applications, for instance. A more conservative answer would be to
>> add it to c.h. OTOH, postgres_ext.h is where the Oid typedef lives,
>> so I do see the consistency of adding this there. Hard choice.
> How about two copies: one in postgres_fe.h and one in postgres.h?
That seems uglier than either of the other choices.
I don't personally have a huge problem with adding atooid in
postgres_ext.h, but I thought I'd better flag the potential issue
to see if anyone else thinks it's a big problem.
>> The oid_cmp() move looks fine if we only need it on the server side.
>> But doesn't pg_dump have one too?
> The pg_dump one isn't a qsort comparator, though.
OK.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jesper Pedersen | 2017-01-12 14:38:53 | Re: Retiring from the Core Team |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-01-12 14:33:23 | Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal |