| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Chapman Flack <jcflack(at)acm(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix |
| Date: | 2024-05-15 21:24:53 |
| Message-ID: | 1842069.1715808293@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:
> What portability issues do you forsee? We already look up the same symbol in
> all the shared libraries ("Pg_magic_func"), so we know that we can deal with
> duplicate function names. Are you thinking that somehow we'd end up with
> symbol interposition or something?
No, it's the dependence on the physical library file name that's
bothering me. Maybe that won't be an issue, but I foresee requests
like "would you please case-fold it" or "the extension-trimming rule
isn't quite right", etc.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2024-05-15 21:46:41 | Re: Why is citext/regress failing on hamerkop? |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-05-15 21:14:18 | Re: Adding the extension name to EData / log_line_prefix |