| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: DTrace probe patch for OS X Leopard |
| Date: | 2008-02-29 05:44:35 |
| Message-ID: | 22697.1204263875@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Is c.h the right place to include this? The probes are only in the backend
>> code, so perhaps postgres.h would be more appropriate. Or just include it in
>> the .c files that need it, of which there are only 3.
>>
> I think putting probes.h in c.h is the right place. It's true that the
> probes are only in the backend now and only in a few files, but in the
> future I can foresee probes added to more files in the backend, the
> procedural language code or any of the commands (initdb, psql, etc).
I agree with Peter. There are a whole lot of include files that are
needed by way more than 3 .c files, and yet are not folded into
postgres.h. c.h is right out.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-29 06:32:40 | Re: tuplestore_putvalues() |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-02-29 05:17:51 | Re: Fix for initdb failures on Vista |