| From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT |
| Date: | 2021-08-23 14:50:44 |
| Message-ID: | CAOBaU_b_0AYL8grF-PtDR4DTC=HE3MCpf5M6jJaTyLQ9KsCbqQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 10:15 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> And yes, I absolutely would prohibit extensions from accessing many
> of them, if there were a reasonable way to do it. It would be a good
> start towards establishing a defined API for extensions.
The v2 patch I sent does that, at least when compiling with GCC. I
didn't find something similar for clang, but I only checked quickly.
I'm assuming that the unreasonable part is having to add some extra
attribute to the variable? Would it be acceptable if wrapped into
some other macro, as I proposed?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2021-08-23 14:56:52 | Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT |
| Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2021-08-23 14:47:54 | Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT |