Re: ilist.h is not useful as-is

> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > The first attached patch adds slist_delete_current(), updates the
> > comments addressing your points and converts the bgworker code to pass
> > the iterator around (it's more efficient which might actually matter
> > with a few hundred bgworkers).
> > I found the added newlines in slist_foreach_modify useful, but maybe they
> > should be removed again.
> 
> > I think this should be included in 9.3 once reviewed.
> 
> Agreed; since we have not shipped ilist.h in a release yet, the benefits
> of having it behave the same in all branches should outweigh any pain
> from changing this post-beta.

Especially as it shouldn't break any existing working code since the old
API is still there. Obviously it breaks the ABI, but ...

On 2013-07-24 14:29:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > The second patch adds a regression test for background workers via
> > worker_spi which I used to test slist_delete_current() addition. It's not 100% as
> > it, but I thought it worthwile to post it anyway
> 
> Hm.  I'll review and commit the ilist changes, but Alvaro or somebody
> should decide if such a test is sensible.  I'd be a bit worried about
> it in a "make installcheck" context ...

I've disabled installcheck for that reason. Is there any way to override
a makefile target in gnu make without a warning?

If we want coverage for statically registered workers - which seems like
a good idea, we need our own postgresql.conf stanza and thus a manual
pg_regress invocation anyway. Which should fix that error.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services