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

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
Date
Msg-id f639ee9e-d917-c4f4-6c4a-7e9aed36f86a@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 12.07.22 03:10, Thomas Munro wrote:
> AFAIK we generally only use pg_whatever() when there's a good reason,
> such as an incompatibility, a complication or a different abstraction
> that you want to highlight to a reader.  The reason here was
> temporary: we couldn't implement standard pread/pwrite perfectly on
> ancient HP-UX, but we*can*  implement it on Windows, so the reason is
> gone.
> 
> These particular pg_ prefixes have only been in our tree for a few
> years and I was hoping to boot them out again before they stick, like
> "Size".  I like using standard interfaces where possible for the very
> basic stuff, to de-weird our stuff.

I agree.  That's been the established approach.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUG] Logical replication failure "ERROR: could not map filenode "base/13237/442428" to relation OID" with catalog modifying txns
Next
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup