Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:55 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>> OTOH, if that is okay, then I think we can avoid few #ifdef WIN32 that
>> this patch introduces and can have consistency for this operation on
>> both linux and Windows.
> Having one code path for everything seems appealing to me, but what do
> others think?
Generally I'd be in favor of avoiding platform-dependent code where
possible, but that doesn't represent a YES vote for this particular
patch. It looks pretty messy in a quick look, even granting that the
#ifdef WIN32's would all go away.
A larger question here is about forward/backward compatibility of the
basebackup files. Changing the representation of symlinks like this
would break that. Maybe we don't care, not sure (is there already a
catversion check for these things?). Changing the file format for only
some platforms seems like definitely a bad idea though.
regards, tom lane
