Global Variables (Was: Re: Discontent with development process (was:Re: pgaccess - the discussion is over) )
От | Marc G. Fournier |
---|---|
Тема | Global Variables (Was: Re: Discontent with development process (was:Re: pgaccess - the discussion is over) ) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020514132728.U75064-100000@mail1.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Discontent with development process (was:Re: pgaccess - the discussion is over) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Mark (mlw) ... could you generate a listing of those variables you feel would need to be moved to a 'global structure' and post that to the list? That would at least give us a starting point, instead of both sides guessing at what is/would be involved ... On Tue, 14 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > Jan Wieck <janwieck@yahoo.com> writes: > > As I understood it the idea was to put the stuff, the > > backends inherit from the postmaster, into a centralized > > place, instead of having it spread out all over the place. > > What's wrong with that? > > The main objection to it in my mind is that what had been private > variables in specific modules now become exceedingly public. Instead of > looking at "static int foo" and *knowing* that all the references are in > the current file, you have to go trolling the entire backend to see who > is referencing pg_globals.foo. > > I have not counted to see how many variables are really affected; if > there's only a few then it doesn't matter much. But the people who > have done this so far have all reported inserting tons of #ifdefs, > which leads me to the assumption that there's a lot of 'em. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: