Re: plpython vs _POSIX_C_SOURCE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: 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 04:37:44
Message-ID: 2588005.1674621464@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> Patches attached.

+1 for 0001. I'm still nervous about 0002. However, maybe the
cases that we had trouble with are legacy issues that nobody cares
about anymore in 2023. We can always look for another answer if
we get complaints, I guess.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message mahendrakar s 2023-01-25 04:46:15 Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2023-01-25 04:35:01 Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply