Re: Access violation from palloc, Visual Studio 2005, C-language function
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Access violation from palloc, Visual Studio 2005, C-language function |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18814.1268247030@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Access violation from palloc, Visual Studio 2005, C-language function ("Kevin Flanagan" <kevin-f@linkprior.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Access violation from palloc, Visual Studio 2005, C-language function
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Flanagan" <kevin-f@linkprior.com> writes: >>> Hard to tell without seeing the actual code and a stack trace, but I'd >>> bet that you haven't fully resolved the build process problems you >>> mentioned earlier. > I've attached a zip of the (tiny) project, and a text file with the contents > of the module containing the C-language functions. The only difference from > sample code is that (as pointed out by Takahiro Itagaki in his post here of > 8th March) the function implementations need decorating with > __declspec(dllexport). Mph. I don't actually believe that, nor do I believe the #define BUILDING_DLL you put in, because neither of those are needed in any of our contrib modules. What I suspect at this point is that the reference to CurrentMemoryContext in the palloc() macro is being bollixed by having the wrong value for BUILDING_DLL. However, not having a Windows build environment to experiment with, I'll have to defer to somebody with more experience in that. (I wonder BTW if we should rename BUILDING_DLL, because it seems a bit misnamed. AIUI it's supposed to be set while building the core backend, not while building loadable modules.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: