Horton

Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT

Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Ashesh Vashi <ashesh.vashi@enterprisedb.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2014-02-03T14:25:14Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. MinGW: Link with shell32.dll instead of shfolder.dll.

  2. Centralize getopt-related declarations in a new header file pg_getopt.h.

  3. Get rid of use of dlltool in Mingw builds.

  4. Export a few more symbols required for test_shm_mq module.

  5. Export set_latch_on_sigusr1 symbol for Windows.

  6. Use SHGetFolderPath instead of SHGetSpecialFolderPath to find the

On 2014-02-03 22:23:16 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 02/03/2014 06:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I think that'd be an exercise in futility. We're not talking about a
> > general purpose library here, where I agree -fvisibility=hidden is a
> > useful thing, but about the backend. We'd break countless extensions
> > people have written. Most of those have been authored on *nix.
> > To make any form of sense we'd need to have a really separate API
> > layer between internal/external stuff. That doesn't seem likely to
> > arrive anytime soon, if ever.
> > I think all that would achieve is that we'd regularly need to backpatch
> > visibility fixes. And have countless pointless flames about which
> > variables to expose.
> 
> Fair point. If we're not going to define a proper API, then export
> control is not useful. And since there isn't a proper API, nor any on
> the cards, _that_ is a reasonable reason to just export all.

We have a (mostly) proper API. Just not an internal/external API split.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- 
 Andres Freund	                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services