Re: PG12, PGXS and linking pgfeutils - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PG12, PGXS and linking pgfeutils
Date
Msg-id 9755.1557775997@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PG12, PGXS and linking pgfeutils  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: PG12, PGXS and linking pgfeutils  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: PG12, PGXS and linking pgfeutils  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> I wonder if a better solution isn't to move the file_utils stuff to
>> fe_utils.  Half of it is frontend-specific.  The only one that should be
>> shared to backend seems to be fsync_fname ... but instead of sharing it,
>> we have a second copy in fd.c.

> Hm, if file_utils is the only thing in common/ that uses this, and we
> expect that to remain true, that would fix the issue.  But ...

Thumbing through commit cc8d41511, I see that it already touched
five common/ modules

diff --git a/src/common/controldata_utils.c b/src/common/controldata_utils.c
diff --git a/src/common/file_utils.c b/src/common/file_utils.c
diff --git a/src/common/pgfnames.c b/src/common/pgfnames.c
diff --git a/src/common/restricted_token.c b/src/common/restricted_token.c
diff --git a/src/common/rmtree.c b/src/common/rmtree.c

Several of those have substantial backend components, so moving them
to fe_utils is a nonstarter.  I think moving fe_utils/logging.[hc] to
common/ is definitely the way to get out of this problem.


I started working on a patch to do that, and soon noticed that there
are pre-existing files logging.[hc] in src/bin/pg_rewind/.  This seems
like a Bad Thing, in fact the #includes in pg_rewind/ are already a
little confused due to this.  I think we should either rename those
two pg_rewind files to something else, or rename the generic ones,
perhaps to "fe_logging.[hc]".  The latter could be done nearly
trivially as part of the movement patch, but on cosmetic grounds
I'd be more inclined to do the former instead.  Thoughts?

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: What is an item pointer, anyway?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: What is an item pointer, anyway?