From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: many copies of atooid() and oid_cmp() |
Date: | 2017-03-01 16:56:44 |
Message-ID: | e47954ef-152c-f4d6-c2d9-942f2a7c127b@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/12/17 09:36, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 1/11/17 11:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> +1 for the concept, but I'm a bit worried about putting atooid() in
>>> postgres_ext.h. That's going to impose on the namespace of libpq-using
>>> applications, for instance. A more conservative answer would be to
>>> add it to c.h. OTOH, postgres_ext.h is where the Oid typedef lives,
>>> so I do see the consistency of adding this there. Hard choice.
>
>> How about two copies: one in postgres_fe.h and one in postgres.h?
>
> That seems uglier than either of the other choices.
>
> I don't personally have a huge problem with adding atooid in
> postgres_ext.h, but I thought I'd better flag the potential issue
> to see if anyone else thinks it's a big problem.
committed as is then
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Soref | 2017-03-01 16:56:47 | Re: Possible spelling fixes |
Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2017-03-01 16:55:16 | Re: Skip all-visible pages during second HeapScan of CIC |