Re: walprotocol.h vs frontends

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: walprotocol.h vs frontends
Date: 2011-08-15 14:53:55
Message-ID: 3103.1313420035@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 16:20, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> However, for a narrow fix, I could see moving the data type definition
>> to someplace with fewer dependencies. Perhaps split it into a separate
>> file timestamp_type.h, or something like that.

> Yes, that seems to fix the problem of timestamptz. See the attached
> patch - seems ok?

Don't think you should expose fsec_t, nor most of those macros. The
foo_per_bar values are just namespace clutter.

> I also ran into a similar problem with some WAL macro definitions that
> are in xlog_internal.h. I've moved them to xlogdefs.h in the attached
> xlog.diff file. Does that seem ok as well, or should I move them
> somewhere else?

I don't like the idea of exposing those to frontends, either. What do
you actually *need* out of that, and why?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-08-15 14:56:00 Re: synchronized snapshots
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2011-08-15 14:44:33 Re: walprotocol.h vs frontends