| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
| Subject: | Re: new clang warnings about unused global variables |
| Date: | 2026-09-07 16:14:19 |
| Message-ID: | f31adc8f-e84d-460c-af6e-beaf6236170c@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03.09.26 15:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
>> I sense that nobody is going to have issues with this. Any objections
>> to backpatching this? I suspect that over time many more people are
>> going to run into this, so keeping the backbranches warning-free seems
>> sensible.
>
> Agreed, we usually like to keep the back branches warning-free too.
>
> But I concur with Andreas that 0005 looks a bit half-baked.
> Maybe that's the right amount of effort for the back branches,
> but something else should happen in HEAD.
Right. Here is another patch at the end (0006) that I propose for
master only that makes using unsupported options an error. Some
Windows-only options already behaved that way, so this just makes the
rest consistent.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-Remove-unused-global-variable-xlog.c.patch | text/plain | 3.6 KB |
| v2-0002-Remove-unused-global-variable-test_resowner.patch | text/plain | 2.1 KB |
| v2-0003-Remove-unused-global-variable-pg_dump.patch | text/plain | 1.4 KB |
| v2-0004-Remove-unused-global-variable-postmaster.patch | text/plain | 1.3 KB |
| v2-0005-Silence-warnings-about-unused-global-variables-pg.patch | text/plain | 2.0 KB |
| v2-0006-pg_ctl-Error-out-on-Windows-only-options-elsewher.patch | text/plain | 4.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nazir Bilal Yavuz | 2026-09-07 16:29:25 | Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2026-09-07 15:57:34 | Re: Offline data checksum changes can cause incorrect checksum state on standbys |