Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
Date: 2022-07-12 12:01:40
Message-ID: CA+Tgmoaw6VBC9Xzr4vOaC0kc-94jb9nzH8MY38Gqn7=wy=i_3w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 9:11 PM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hmm, but that's not what we're doing in general. For example, on
> Windows we're redirecting open() to a replacement function of our own,
> we're not using "pg_open()" in our code. That's not an example based
> on AC_REPLACE_FUNCS, but there are plenty of those too. Isn't this
> quite well established?

Yes. I just don't care for it.

Sounds like I'm in the minority, though.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aleksander Alekseev 2022-07-12 12:15:17 Re: [PATCH] Compression dictionaries for JSONB
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2022-07-12 10:58:48 Re: [BUG] Logical replication failure "ERROR: could not map filenode "base/13237/442428" to relation OID" with catalog modifying txns