Re: plpython vs _POSIX_C_SOURCE

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: plpython vs _POSIX_C_SOURCE
Date: 2023-01-25 21:26:49
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Pushed the patches. So far no fallout, and hoverfly recovered.

I just checked a few of the more odd animals (Illumos, Solaris, old OpenBSD,
AIX) that already ran without finding new warnings.

There's a few more animals to run before I'll fully relax though.

On 2023-01-25 08:31:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> Plus, the cost of experimentation here seems very low. Sure, something
> might break, but if it does, we can just change it back, or change it
> again. That's not really a big deal. The thing that would be a big
> deal, maybe, is if we released and only found out afterward that this
> caused some subtle and horrible problem for which we had no
> back-patchable fix, but that seems pretty unlikely.



Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2023-01-25 21:30:07 Re: GUCs to control abbreviated sort keys
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-01-25 21:25:19 Set arbitrary GUC options during initdb