| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alexander Korotkov <akorotkov(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: postgres.h included from relcache.h - but removing it breaks pg_upgrade |
| Date: | 2021-09-14 02:40:19 |
| Message-ID: | 550651.1631587219@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> I noticed that postgres.h is included from relcache.h (starting in [1]) and
> wanted to fix that - it violates our usual policy against including postgres.h
> from within headers.
Ugh, yeah, that's entirely against policy.
As for the fix ... what in the world is pg_upgrade doing including
relcache.h? It seems like there's a more fundamental problem here:
either relcache.h is declaring something that needs to be elsewhere,
or pg_upgrade is doing something it should not.
> I was also wondering if we should put something in c.h and postgres.h to avoid
> redundant includes?
No. If anything, I'd want to throw an error for "redundant" includes
of these files, because it's a pretty good red flag about
poorly-thought-out header modularization.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2021-09-14 02:57:07 | Re: postgres.h included from relcache.h - but removing it breaks pg_upgrade |
| Previous Message | houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2021-09-14 02:26:57 | RE: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |