Re: beta time

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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