Re: [HACKERS] pg_waldump's inclusion of backend headers is a mess

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> >> Thoughts, comments, objections, better ideas?
> >
> > No better ideas.  I'm a bit concerned about declarations needed both by
> > normal and xlog related routines, but I guess that can be solved by a
> > third header as you did.
> 
> Yeah, that doesn't seem bad to me.  I think it's actually fairly
> unfortunate that we've just shoved declarations from 3 or 4 or 5
> different source files into a single header in many of these cases.  I
> think it leads to not thinking clearly about what the dependencies
> between the different source files in the index AM stuff is, and
> certainly there seems to be some room for improvement there,
> especially with regard to gist and gin.

Agreed -- on a very quick read, I like the way you split the GIN
headers.

I don't think the concern is really the number of source files involved,
because I think in some places we're bad at splitting source files
sensibly.

> Sorting that out is a bigger
> project than I'm prepared to undertake right now, but I think this is
> probably a step in the right direction.

Yes, I think so too.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services