Re: headerscheck ccache support

Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
To: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-12-04T10:52:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 28.11.25 14:10, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 28.11.25 13:59, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>> On 2025-Nov-28, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
>>
>>> I could not apply patches cleanly. Am I missing something?
>>
>> Yeah, I couldn't get `git am` or `git apply` to accept the patches
>> either, not even with -3.  However, `patch -p1` does accept it.  Weird.
> 
> I had another commit in my local branch that I needed to get the actual 
> compilations working, but which was unrelated to this discussion. 
> Apparently, this created enough fuzz to break the subsequent patches. 
> Here is the patch series again completely, but ignore the 0000 patch for 
> now.

I have committed patches 0000 and 0001, which was the main subject of 
this thread.

What do people think about patch 0002, which runs headerscheck and 
cpluspluscheck in parallel on ci?  It should save several seconds of 
wall-clock time for that task, and I don't see any drawbacks, unless you 
want to retain the specific previous output format for some reason.

I don't plan to pursue the other parallelization work (patch 0003) at 
this time.



Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. ci: Run headerscheck and cpluspluscheck in parallel

  2. headerscheck ccache support

  3. headerscheck: Use LLVM_CPPFLAGS