From: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Custom variables and flags, again |
Date: | 2008-11-17 01:12:10 |
Message-ID: | 20081117094642.81E6.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> void DefineCustomVariable(enum config_type type, const void *variable);
> What happens
> when we add some field or other to those structs?
I considered the case and chose the new interface because it behaves
*well* in the case. We can freely add new fields at the end of structs
(config_generic and config_<type>) as long as zero means 'default' in
the new fields. Unassigned fields in struct variables are filled with
zero in C.
There are problems when we modify the middle fields in those
structs, but it means modification of existing arguments in
DefineCustomXXXVariable(); The same problems occur in both
implementations.
Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-11-17 01:54:23 | Re: Custom variables and flags, again |
Previous Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2008-11-16 22:41:38 | Re: [HACKERS] pgsql: Enable script to generate preproc.y in build process. |