From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |
Date: | 2022-08-12 07:15:55 |
Message-ID: | 81bb50ca-d0ea-8cb2-7453-a5058a7b49a8@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11.08.22 12:02, Thomas Munro wrote:
> * The concept of a no-Unix-socket build is removed. We should be
> able to do that now, right? Peter E seemed to say approximately that
> in the commit message for 797129e5. Or is there a thought that a new
> operating system might show up that doesn't have 'em and we'd wish
> we'd kept this stuff well marked out?
Most uses of HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS are not useful independent of that
question. For example, you patch has
@@ -348,7 +343,6 @@ StreamServerPort(int family, const char *hostName,
unsigned short portNumber,
hint.ai_flags = AI_PASSIVE;
hint.ai_socktype = SOCK_STREAM;
-#ifdef HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS
if (family == AF_UNIX)
{
/*
But on a platform without support for Unix sockets, family just won't be
AF_UNIX at run time, so there is no need to hide that if branch.
Note that we already require that AF_UNIX is defined on all platforms,
even if the kernel doesn't support Unix sockets.
But maybe it would be better to make that a separate patch from the
sys/un.h configure changes, just so there is more clarity around it.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-08-12 07:31:40 | Re: Expand palloc/pg_malloc API |
Previous Message | John Naylor | 2022-08-12 07:12:15 | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |