Re: partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql

On 04/06/2017 12:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
>> Any thoughts on whether 0001a and 0001b ought to be backpatched? I'm
>> thinking not given the lack of past complaints but it might make sense
>> to do.
>
> I think 0001a absolutely needs to be, because it is fixing what is really
> an ABI violation: sepgsql_needs_fmgr_hook is supposed to return our notion
> of bool, but as things stand it's returning _Bool (which is why the
> compiler is complaining). Now we might get away with that on most
> hardware, but on platforms where those are different widths, it's possible
> to imagine function-return conventions that would make it fail.
>
> 0001b seems to only be needed for compilers that aren't smart enough
> to see that tclass won't be referenced for RELKIND_INDEX, so it's
> just cosmetic.

Ok, committed/pushed that way.

I found some missing bits in the 0002 patch -- new version attached.
Will wait on new regression tests before committing, but I expect we'll
have those by end of today and be able to commit the rest tomorrow.

Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development