Re: SIGSEGV taken on 8.1 during dump/reload - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Martijn van Oosterhout
Subject Re: SIGSEGV taken on 8.1 during dump/reload
Date
Msg-id 20051112185139.GE571@svana.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SIGSEGV taken on 8.1 during dump/reload  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: SIGSEGV taken on 8.1 during dump/reload
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 12:44:23PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes:
> > If we don't like imposing link time constraints, we could require
> > people to include:
>
> > #ifdef PG_MAGIC_BLOCK
> > PG_MAGIC_BLOCK;
> > #endif
>
> I was hoping to avoid forcing source-code changes, but something like
> that might be the best solution.  Anyone think it's unreasonable?

Alternativly, you could make it optional for a release (print warning
that magic block wasn't found). Next release require it. It's a small
enough change that it wouldn't require huge amounts of effort on the
part of module writers.

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a
> tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone
> else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Cursor estimated row count
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV taken on 8.1 during dump/reload