Re: HAVE_WORKING_LINK still needed?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: HAVE_WORKING_LINK still needed? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 17964.1582908905@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | HAVE_WORKING_LINK still needed? (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: HAVE_WORKING_LINK still needed?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > I came across the HAVE_WORKING_LINK define in pg_config_manual.h. > AFAICT, hard links are supported on Windows and Cygwin in the OS > versions that we support, and pg_upgrade already contains the required > shim. It seems to me we could normalize and simplify that, as in the > attached patches. (Perhaps rename durable_link_or_rename() then.) I > successfully tested on MSVC, MinGW, and Cygwin. I don't have any way to test on Windows, but this patchset passes eyeball review. +1 for getting rid of the special cases. Also +1 for s/durable_link_or_rename/durable_link/. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: