| From: | Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PL/R regression on windows, but not linux with master. |
| Date: | 2021-04-11 16:51:27 |
| Message-ID: | CADK3HH+8QS46z0LeC8wvFf-PXqEiL3sQeAUuaaeyMe8wbfYwwA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 at 12:43, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> >> Would an equivalent "PGWARNING" be something we are open to adding and
> >> back-patching?
>
> > It's not real obvious how pl/r could solve this in a reliable way
> > otherwise, so adding that would be OK with me, but I wonder whether
> > back-patching is going to help you any. You'd still need to compile
> > against older headers I should think. So I'd suggest
> > (1) add PGWARNING in HEAD only
>
> Concretely, maybe like the attached?
>
+1 from me.
I especially like the changes to the comments as it's more apparent what
they should be used for.
Dave Cramer
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-04-11 16:54:45 | Possible SSI bug in heap_update |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-04-11 16:43:15 | Re: PANIC: wrong buffer passed to visibilitymap_clear |