| From: | Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bryan Green <dbryan(dot)green(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Add Windows support for backtrace_functions (MSVC only) |
| Date: | 2025-10-30 09:37:07 |
| Message-ID: | 202510300932.isdvgkzqzshk@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025-Oct-30, Jakub Wartak wrote:
> Hi Bryan, cfbot is red. I'm was fan of having those tests for this
> (bring complexity and we didn't have tests for Linux backtrace
> anyway), but now MINGW win32 is failing on those tests where the
> feature is not present:
I hate to say this after the code is written, but I think we should not
put any tests in the first step. I predict that these are going to be
enormously brittle and that we'll waste a lot of time making them
stable. I think we should commit the Windows support for backtraces
first, then consider whether we actually want TAP tests for the overall
feature. We've gone several years with glibc backtrace support without
any tests -- why do we think the Windows implementation thereof _must_
necessarily have them?
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
<Schwern> It does it in a really, really complicated way
<crab> why does it need to be complicated?
<Schwern> Because it's MakeMaker.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bryan Green | 2025-10-30 09:40:06 | Re: [PATCH] Add Windows support for backtrace_functions (MSVC only) |
| Previous Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2025-10-30 09:29:29 | Re: Skip unregistered custom kinds on stats load |