pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2022 10:52:51 -0400
Message-ID: <488234.1660229571@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUKG+L_3brvh=8e0BW_VfX9h7MtwgN=nFHP5o7X2oZucY9dg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+hUKGJ3LHeP9w5Fgzdr4G8AnEtJ=z=p6hGDEm4qYGEUX5B6fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+Tgmoazusui5EoU_7Z=AgwC5pTAqDndTa7d-owjvQwG3zoRhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+hUKGLLJUMDgCzOK5K4NE6PpU87Ka7t7RQsZoZAZ_EKfL5L+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+Tgmoaw6VBC9Xzr4vOaC0kc-94jb9nzH8MY38Gqn7=wy=i_3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20220712173352.trdeq66asbv6vf2q@awork3.anarazel.de>
	<1662559.1657648462@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+hUKG+MOzmDkr27ceG8+uwgFxbJUUv699V3VP3DCioQigrf7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<1249825.1658622186@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+hUKGLryBW4fNYoXzMG9y1e0H-QOTdSiTG46xCr1DNuuPwbeg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+hUKGJMcwbzRyfTocfxbPBUhERqKE42d-L22jQ+vpB7an-NjQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20220804034343.unm4rdynedbigamv@awork3.anarazel.de>
	<3322724.1659586159@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+hUKGJ5ej33AJL19sQph7Z8SFZ6+aUSKxFTS6pvk2Y8J9Tcwg@mail.gmail.com>
	<295419.1659918447@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+hUKGK=N8W2uFPdJr07Rs4dgRtbzKaYvCaPQasX3S8=aTO5PQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<747620.1660002360@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+hUKG+L_3brvh=8e0BW_VfX9h7MtwgN=nFHP5o7X2oZucY9dg@mail.gmail.com>

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> The most interesting things to say about these ones are:
>  * The concept of a no-Unix-socket build is removed.  We should be
> able to do that now, right?  Peter E seemed to say approximately that
> in the commit message for 797129e5.  Or is there a thought that a new
> operating system might show up that doesn't have 'em and we'd wish
> we'd kept this stuff well marked out?

I'm kind of down on removing that.  I certainly think it's premature
to do so today, when we haven't even yet shipped a release that
assumes we can always define it on Windows -- I won't be too surprised
if we get pushback on that after 15.0 is out.  But in general, Unix
sockets seem like kind of an obvious thing that might not be there
on some future platform.

Instead of what you did in 0002, I propose putting
"#define HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS 1" in pg_config_manual.h, and keeping
the #if's that reference it as-is.

All the rest of this seems fine on a cursory readthrough.  Even if
we discover that header foo.h is less universal than we thought,
putting back one or two configure tests won't be hard.

			regards, tom lane





view thread (108+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <488234.1660229571@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../488234.1660229571@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/488234.1660229571@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, thomas.munro@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, andrew@dunslane.net, robertmhaas@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
  In-Reply-To: <488234.1660229571@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox