Re: PGDLLEXPORTing all GUCs? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Craig Ringer
Subject Re: PGDLLEXPORTing all GUCs?
Date
Msg-id 536A428D.50805@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PGDLLEXPORTing all GUCs?  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 05/07/2014 09:45 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I think what Craig actually tries to propose is to mark all GUCs
> currently exported in headers PGDLLIMPORT. Currently it's easy to have
> extensions that work on sane systems but not windows. If they're already
> exposed in headers I don't think changes get any harder just because thy
> also can get used on windows...

Yes, rather.

Exporting GUCs that're currently static wouldn't make sense.

I'm just taking about making what works on !windows work on Windows. If
a GUC is declared extern in a header, it should be PGDLLIMPORT.

-- Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Petr Jelinek
Date:
Subject: Re: bgworker crashed or not?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PGDLLEXPORTing all GUCs?