Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmoaw6VBC9Xzr4vOaC0kc-94jb9nzH8MY38Gqn7=wy=i_3w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 9:11 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmm, but that's not what we're doing in general.  For example, on
> Windows we're redirecting open() to a replacement function of our own,
> we're not using "pg_open()" in our code.  That's not an example based
> on AC_REPLACE_FUNCS, but there are plenty of those too.  Isn't this
> quite well established?

Yes. I just don't care for it.

Sounds like I'm in the minority, though.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUG] Logical replication failure "ERROR: could not map filenode "base/13237/442428" to relation OID" with catalog modifying txns
Next
From: Aleksander Alekseev
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Compression dictionaries for JSONB