From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ashesh Vashi <ashesh(dot)vashi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT |
Date: | 2014-02-03 10:37:01 |
Message-ID: | 20140203103701.GA1225@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-02-03 12:00:40 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> I think it's a good thing personally - we shouldn't be exporting every
> little internal var in the symbol table.
>
> If we built with -fvisibility=hidden on 'nix there'd be no need to
> complain about commits being on on 'nix then breaking on Windows, 'cos
> the 'nix build would break in the same place. That's all or nothing
> though, there's no "vars hidden, procs exported" option in gcc.
I think that'd be an exercise in futility. We're not talking about a
general purpose library here, where I agree -fvisibility=hidden is a
useful thing, but about the backend. We'd break countless extensions
people have written. Most of those have been authored on *nix.
To make any form of sense we'd need to have a really separate API
layer between internal/external stuff. That doesn't seem likely to
arrive anytime soon, if ever.
I think all that would achieve is that we'd regularly need to backpatch
visibility fixes. And have countless pointless flames about which
variables to expose.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2014-02-03 10:43:04 | Re: Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire |
Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2014-02-03 10:36:22 | Re: UNION ALL on partitioned tables won't use indices. |