Re: On the warpath again about ill-considered inclusion nests
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: On the warpath again about ill-considered inclusion nests |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20141113023641.GB1791@alvin.alvh.no-ip.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | On the warpath again about ill-considered inclusion nests (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: On the warpath again about ill-considered inclusion
nests
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > I noticed that the recent custom-path commit completely ignored my > advice about not including executor headers into planner headers or > vice versa. On the way to fixing that, I was dismayed to discover > that the RLS patch has utterly bollixed all semblance of modularization > of the headers. src/include/rewrite/rowsecurity.h, which one would > reasonably think to be a rewriter header (nevermind its header comment > to the contrary), nonetheless includes execnodes.h (executor stuff) > and relation.h (planner stuff), neither of which a rewriter header > has any business including. And if that weren't bad enough, it's > been included into utils/rel.h (relcache), which is close enough > to guaranteeing that all planner and executor symbols are visible > in every darn module we've got. Might as well just put everything > we have in postgres.h and abandon all pretense of modularity. I noticed the RLS side of things a week ago as well, and wasn't very pleased about it. I don't know about an axe, but we do need some serious cleanup. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: