From: | Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> |
---|---|
To: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
Cc: | Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Include files for SPI are not installed |
Date: | 2001-02-06 19:29:56 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.3.96.1010206202459.3799J-100000@ara.zf.jcu.cz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
> Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> > > Certain include files are installed by src/include/Makefile and by
> > > interfaces/libpq++/Makefile. However, they in turn include others that
> > > are not installed, thus obviating the usefulness of the ones that are.
>
> > In your module you can use arbitrary routines from PG not only SPI,
> > for example you trigger needs work with some datetypes and for this
> > needs include anything from include/utils/ ... It expect install *all*
> > header files. Not is better download PG sources and use -I option for
> > your gcc?
>
> No. Full tree takes at minimum 36MB -- even pulling the _entire_
> src/include tree over is only 2MB.
Agree, *all* in src/include is good idea, but current /usr/include is
away from this. Oliver's idea was include needful SPI stuff only.
Before 1.5 years I wrote first trigger for PG and first thing I found
that /usr/include is not usable for me.
> > I expect header files on /usr/include/pgsql for client programming not
> > for SPI.
>
> Why? I know of several people doing SPI work with no source tree
> installed.
Hmm, it must be very limited outlook without source tree:-)
Karel
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joe Mitchell | 2001-02-06 19:52:47 | Duplicate OIDs in pg_attribute |
Previous Message | Mathieu Dube | 2001-02-06 19:15:22 | Re: using the same connection? |