Re: split TOAST support out of postgres.h - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nikita Malakhov
Subject Re: split TOAST support out of postgres.h
Date
Msg-id CAN-LCVM4xnwJz7N7j=Dy=HiAXn-Af7hStr-Z5VSjMK9YzzTneA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: split TOAST support out of postgres.h  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

I've thought about this while working on Pluggable TOAST and 64-bit
TOAST value ID myself. Agree with #2 to seem the best of the above.
There are not so many places where a new header should be included.

On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 6:08 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> ... Then we could either

> 1) Include varatt.h in postgres.h, similar to elog.h and palloc.h.  That
> way we clean up the files a bit but don't change any external interfaces.

> 2) Just let everyone who needs it include the new file.

> 3) Compromise: You can avoid most "damage" by having fmgr.h include
> varatt.h.  That satisfies most data types and extension code.  That way,
> there are only a few places that need an explicit include of varatt.h.

> I went with the last option in my patch.

I dunno, #3 seems kind of unprincipled.  Also, since fmgr.h is included
so widely, I doubt it is buying very much in terms of reducing header
footprint.  How bad is it to do #2?

                        regards, tom lane




--
Regards,
Nikita Malakhov
Postgres Professional 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Avoiding unnecessary clog lookups while freezing
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: Is RecoveryConflictInterrupt() entirely safe in a signal handler?