From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: beta time |
Date: | 2004-08-08 03:03:57 |
Message-ID: | 200408080303.i7833vU12064@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >> I have two things left before beta. I want to make sure the release
> >> notes are current against CVS and I want to make sure the win32
> >> tablespace symlink changes I just made work.
>
> > Tom, when you updated the release notes, did you do a CVS log and
> > already get all the new stuff as of Aug 6?
>
> Yes I did. I think the release notes are good to go for beta,
> with the possible exception of mentioning any array-input-parsing
> hacking that Joe might be about to commit.
OK. Thanks for doing that.
> I think though that we might have some other must-fix Win32 issues :-(.
> What are we going to do about this libpgport-depends-on-the-backend
> business?
I have Claudio on IM right now and am getting the details. I wasn't
aware it was such a problem but I think it was introduced by rmtree()
and the malloc call.
What I would like to do is to move elog/fprintf out of /port and make a
generic pglog call and have a backend function that calls elog and a
libpq version that calls fprintf. This would remove a lot of FRONTEND
and Makefile compiles and will probably avoid some bugs. The only
tricky part is passing a variable number of arguments. Same behavior for
malloc/palloc.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-08-08 03:06:07 | Re: beta time |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2004-08-08 03:03:56 | Re: beta time |