Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Prevent "snapshot too old" from trying to return pruned TOAST tu
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Prevent "snapshot too old" from trying to return pruned TOAST tu |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoZzBJ0GHBsgkXMQwdonUF6uSLY+z6w-1B0bzNi+TKpA_g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Prevent "snapshot too old" from trying to return pruned TOAST tu (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 10:58 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >>> What is the reason? We refuse to separate frontend and backend >>> headers in any sort of principled way? > >> That was poorly phrased. I'll try again: I can't see any reason for >> using a macro here except that it allows frontend code to compile this >> without breaking. > > Well, the alternative would be to put "#ifndef FRONTEND" around the > static-inline function. That's not very pretty either, and it's > inconsistent with the existing precedent (ie, InitDirtySnapshot). > Also, it presumes that a non-backend includer actually has defined > FRONTEND; that seems to be the case for pg_xlogdump but I do not > think we do that everywhere. That may not be pretty, but it'd be a lot more transparent. If I see #ifndef FRONTEND, I think, oh, that's protecting some stuff that shouldn't be included in front-end compiles. If I see a macro, I not necessarily think of the fact that this may be a way of preventing that code from being compiled in front-end compiles. >> Here's a patch. Is this what you want? > > OK by me. OK, committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: