| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Is it really such a great idea for spi.h to include the world? |
| Date: | 2009-01-06 21:03:15 |
| Message-ID: | 20090106210315.GF27789@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Okay, I'll do a trial patch and we can see exactly how much has to be
> > added (at least among core and contrib) before deciding for sure.
>
> This compiles and passes regression tests. It looks like the main
> things there might be an argument for adding back to spi.h would be
> pg_type.h and builtins.h, as a very large proportion of the files
> using spi.h had to have those added. Comments?
They are both very lean, so no objections. I guess that the pg_type.h
inclusion is needed due to the predefined type OIDs, and it makes me
wonder whether it would be useful to have them in a separate header.
Not enough concern for the idea to even make it to Bruce's open items
mailbox ...
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2009-01-06 21:04:15 | Re: parallel restore |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-06 20:44:31 | Re: Is it really such a great idea for spi.h to include the world? |