From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: includedir_internal headers are not self-contained |
Date: | 2014-04-28 16:21:55 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaAoL_H3Ro4ksqvMQhp+Unx7r7gEmb9X_ZnhOunB5-vSg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> ... which might or might not be the same one that libpgcommon was compiled
>>> with, no? I don't think you're really protecting yourself against version
>>> skew that way.
>
>> The CATALOG_VERSION dependency in that code is a mistake which I didn't
>> notice back then. I can't put too much thought into this issue at this
>> time, but printing fork numbers rather than names seems pretty
>> user-unfriendly to me. Rather than a revert of the whole patch I
>> would hope for some different solution, if possible, though I can't
>> offer anything right now.
>
> I think it would be okay to have a common/ module that encapsulates
> fork names/numbers. It's relpath() and particularly
> TABLESPACE_VERSION_DIRECTORY that bother me from a dependency standpoint.
>
> As far as pg_xlogdump goes, I agree that symbolic fork names are probably
> nice, but I think the case for printing db/ts/rel OIDs as a pathname is a
> whole lot weaker --- to my taste, that's actually an anti-feature.
I might be missing something, but, why?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-04-28 16:46:17 | Re: Planned downtime @ Rackspace |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-04-28 16:14:30 | Re: includedir_internal headers are not self-contained |