From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgwin32_safestat weirdness |
Date: | 2008-04-15 14:39:33 |
Message-ID: | 20080415163933.3d5b2625@mha-laptop |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > Shouldn't be too hard to do, but I keep thinking it'd be cleaner to
> > just not do the redefine when building libpq. It means we'd add a
> > define like BUILDING_LIBPQ or something to the libpq Makefile, and
> > exclude the redefine if set.
>
> +1 for that general approach, but let's call the macro something
> like UNSAFE_STAT_OKAY. If the day ever comes that we need safestat
> inside libpq, or more likely that we want to exclude it from some
> other piece of code, it'll be clearer what to do.
Hmm. I thought BUILDING_LIBPQ would be the more generic one, since we
might want to control other stuff from it. I recall wanting that define
at some point in the past, but I can't recall why... :-)
But - I'll do it with UNSAFE_STAT_OK if that's what ppl want. And then
a simple ifeq() section in libpq Makefile, right?
Or we could have libpq define the BUILDING_LIBPQ, and have a header say
#ifdef BUILDING_LIBPQ / #define UNSAFE_STAT_OK / #endif.... That would
certainly be the most flexible, but maybe not the prettiest solution
until such time as we actually need it.
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2008-04-15 14:44:31 | Re: Problem with site doc search |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-04-15 14:34:15 | Re: pgwin32_safestat weirdness |